Find a Lawyer

SPEEN GULL versus STATE

Section 2302 (b) Appraisal of evidence that the motive for the murder, which was fully proved, could not be excluded merely on the basis that the details of motions were not provided by the complainant when filing an FIR. It was not necessary to give every detail to everyone in the IR. The prosecution proved successful against the accused in these circumstances; during the investigation, a blood-stained hatchet and detector was found on the accused's offer and the serologist's report on the blood was positive. He said that the medical evidence was completely corroborated by the molecular evidence immediately explaining the presence of eyewitnesses at the time of enrollment, it seemed that the natural event occurred on a broad day in a densely populated area, the defendants said. Change was a rare event, otherwise the defense could not establish a valid reason for it. Both witnesses, although related, could not be declared as an interesting witness on the false implications of the accused, but the accused involved in the murder in a fateful trial did not find any such hostility. Both witnesses were examined extensively. , But their testimony cannot be shaken. Their testimony contradicted each other and there was no material contradiction in their evidence. The ocular evidence was reliable and admissible in the circumstances that the injuries attributable to the accused were very serious, which the trial court correctly pronounced the death sentence. In these circumstances, the accompanying accused, however, did not deserve the death sentence because the wounds attributed to him were recovered from the hand, which was an unimportant part of the victim's body, and not so painful that the accused was sentenced to death, Jab top advocate from Shemier lawyer