The testimony of Section 2 (b (b)) was related to the eyewitness testimony and was closely related to the defendant's previous hostile confession between the eyewitnesses, so were the eyewitnesses at the time of the incident. The presence of eyewitnesses was not natural and could also be called witnesses of the occasion, who failed to give any specific reason for their statements in the presence of the police or in court at the time of the incident, it is said that The witnesses were asked to nominate the accused in this case. A 24 hour delay for post mortem examination There was a significant point in the incident, which was used to produce police papers, including the investigation report in which the FIR story was reproduced, there were no witnesses, so they were not true witnesses, even The medical evidence on the very material aspects of this case also contradicts the fact that because of the presence of eyewitnesses suspicious, the TRA could not be relied on without any independent cooperation, with no reduction in the case. There was no crime left by chance, the recovery of a firearm from the accused was legally unforgettable. The purpose could not have been laid for this purpose. Without any further evidence the accused was acquitted on the benefit of the doubt in the circumstances
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
