Find a Lawyer

NAIK MUHAMMAD ALIAS NAIKA versus STATE

Section 302 (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3) Reacting to Evidence Evidence witnesses were convicted and sentenced to death The High Court upheld the sentence but the death sentence was converted to life imprisonment. It was made that the court was a prosecution witness. Interested witnesses were related to the prosecution. The Supreme Court did not find any illegal, misleading, or misinterpreted version of the prosecution, which would otherwise have been credible by the trial court, as well as competent and truthful ocular evidence presented by the prosecution's witnesses. No inherent defect or material finding was found by the High Court in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses whose presence was far from the veil of any suspicion, both the prosecution witnesses were closely related to the accused but the fact of the matter is That only relationships with witnesses are established. The deceased do not show interest or favor on any of the late, the SECO argued that the conviction of the accused was proved by strong motives, the recovery of the Medico legal opinion and the criminal weapons affiliated with ocular reliable testimony. Denied the allegation that there was a dispute between ocular and medical evidence and that he refused to intervene in the sentence. And the appeal approved by the High Court's leave to appeal was denied advocate from Risalpur lawyer