Clauses 4 324, 7 33 evidence L and 4 384 The prosecution's case was to the extent that the acid-containing material was thrown into the house of the prosecutor's witness in which the complainant and his nephew were sleeping, on whose head and The other sections were coated. No evidence is available on the suspect's throwing of the contents of the acid on the body of the complainant's body and the nephew's person, the circumstances submitted against the accused will not be substantiated. ? Reasonable and likely suspected, the suspect actually threw a box containing acid content, since the burning incident on the acid substance distribution is immediate, cannot be blamed, is expected in the slightest. That he will stand till the witnesses come. The fact of the alleged crime could not be substantiated as it was consistent with the prosecution's crime as it failed to explain why the alleged witness stood at the scene until the arrival of the witnesses. Could have chosen to stay, when he allegedly could not be safely prosecuted against the accused for throwing acid at 4 00 and overnight injuring himself. On the basis of such circumstantial evidence it was alleged that he was entitled to the benefit of the doubt, no convincing, clear or credible facts have been made on the record under which the accused can be convicted and allowed to appeal. Can be given, under which the judgment of the trial court may be pronounced. The lie was convicted, set aside, and the accused acquitted
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
