Find a Lawyer

IRFAN SHARIF versus STATE

No one was named in the FIR in the provision of Section 497 Preventive Code (XLV of 1860), Section 324 Explosive Act (IV of 1854), Section 3 guarantee, benefit of doubt, however it was alleged that the mobile The phone number collector is used to commit the crime. In this connection, which contained a mobile number and explosive report under Section 173, the CCP revealed that the accused was arrested on suspicion of attempted mobile phone, which was used to commit the crime. The mobile phone was created to detect the alleged `sim 'owner. A crime print was obtained that reflected the caller's and caller's numbers, but no source for the person who said the print was obtained was brought to the record, under which SIM was used. Yes, he recorded his confession statement in which he stated that the cellphone was used by various persons including his accused brother. Therefore, it cannot be said with certainty that the said SIM was used only by the SIM used for the alleged crime, only 12 days after the incident. The expert's report revealed that the explosive material sent to the voter was unusable, so no opinion could be formed, a deep scrutiny of the evidence in the circumstances, although not valid at the bailout stage, The matter could not be decided on a vacuum and a temporary review of the evidence in this case was earlier leveled at the suspects in connection with the accused's guilt or innocence when the crime or innocence. Were evenly balanced. , This fair law websites from Kurram lawyer