Find a Lawyer

QASIM versus STATE

Section 6464 Penal Code of Conduct (XLV of 1860), Section 302 (b) Definition of Evidence Before the Magistrate's Offense and the Trial Court Was Made A Mandatory and Reasonable Part of the Prosecution Case The confessional statement was controversial. In a statement before the magistrate in connection with the trial, he admitted in his statement that the co-accused had committed the misconduct with the accused, but filed before the trial court under Section 342, CR P.C. In our statement, it is stated that we have committed sodomy at the same time, while in the same statement was filed under Section 2 342 CCPC, the accused has stated that in the trial the failure of the victim There was no sodomy with me, which would be answered to ask for clarification. He was charged with contradictory material contradictions, ending the entire prosecution story. And in the above circumstances the confessional statement should have been dismissed by the trial court, where the decision to acquit the accused was the only basis for confession or admission, it would be deemed a failure to question his sovereignty. It has made the trial case prejudicial. The court, in spite of this content, was obliged to refuse a confessional statement and statement under Section 342 CCPC, by which the accused admitted his guilt for two reasons. First, according to the medical evidence, no wrongdoing was committed late, and secondly under 342 CCPC, the defendant suspected the legal status of the confession offense when the magistrate's statement made the statement. law firms from Tarbela lawyer