Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ASIF versus STATE

Sections 2, 2, 201 doubt4 and ??? ??? benefit of the doubt was a non-observable case of evidence and the prosecutor's case was restored to the legal evidence for three months after his late departure with the accused. But there was no independent evidence on record to show that the accused and the deceased were seen together before the death of the deceased complainant, who had also made dishonest improvement in his statement before the trial court, from the village concerned. No one was offered to prove that he was seen with the victims before his death, depending No, the accused's testimony could be presented on the evidence found for the last time the victim was killed, three of the prosecution's witnesses described the accused's extra-judicial confession, but the three men gave different versions, Depending on the circumstances, the surplus could not be relied upon. Extra-judicial confession of guilt, although otherwise, it was too weak to be obtained with the kind of evidence and easily with the help of a friend Medical evidence, which was not supported by the prosecution case in connection with the retrieval of the trial investigative officer. There was a recruitment and dialogue, like the wire and other articles that concluded that there was no blood stains or anything specific, evidence to identify the incident, because of insufficient evidence. The trigger in the IR could not be seen; no independent evidence could prove that anything was wrong. Ehr was not on the record before any criminal prosecution suspected of prosecution best law firms from Khanbel lawyer