Find a Lawyer

MATLOOB HUSSAIN ALIAS BAGGAN versus STATE

The testimony of the complainants was recorded on the spot two hours after the reduction of the cases in the two editions, and the explanation was not in the record, as to why the matter to the police. Not told? After two days post-mortem on the body of the victim, related papers were prevented until a later date revealed that an FIR was lodged, medical evidence after the debate and availability of the complainant supported the prosecution. It was only to the extent of the fireworks that the victim lost his life, but there was no explanation as to whether the two sides were abnormal regarding the delay of thirty hours between the death and the post-mortem examination. Opposed to each other, both ways will cut short. And it could not be used as certified evidence, evidence on record has shown that the prosecution's witnesses were not present at the time of the appearance and that the prosecution's case was complete again. According to the statement of the police officers / inspector, the accused was involved in the murder of the brother of the accused during the investigation of the matter and defended his defense taken by the accused. Police opinion, but it was just as true that the air could not be fired, however, by repeatedly firing at the victim, the defendant exceeded his right to his personal defense, appeal to the extent of the co-accused was allowed, and It was kept separate. Judging by its extent, he was acquitted and released. The accused's appeal was partially granted and his conviction under section 302 (b), PPC, was changed to a crime under section 302 (c), PPC sought the benefit of section 382. famous high court advocate from Chaininda lawyer