Find a Lawyer

MUNIR AHMED versus STATE

Sections 2?2 (b), 7 337a (ii) and 7 337l (ii) compliment the evidence, complain of a deficiency in the two versions, and both alleged that the other party was the attacker, the prosecution's witness and one of the accused. There is enmity between the medical evidence revealed that one of the accused suffered four injuries on his own. Two wounds were fractured, one of which was declared as missing, Jenna Monggyla, and the other injured Jifa Hashima. As stated, one of the injuries was due to a sharp weapon and the accused was kept in the hospital. Such severe injuries could not be the result of hitting or punching, the father of the two accused also suffered seven injuries. Personal records did not show that such injuries could have been caused by a friendly hand. The witnesses received twelve wounds, which were due to a two-pronged weapon that the deceased's post-mortem examination took place the next day for unknown reasons. Dang killed the deceased after falling down, was acquitted of murder charges. There was no appeal against them, post-mortem examination was delayed after the incident and delay in filing the report. It was recorded after the FIR was discovered. There was no direct enmity with the victim's police inspector, who filed the case, floating at the level of his dishonest record, the prosecution's witnesses gave a highly exaggerated version of the incident, and he was the father of the two accused's investigators. Unable to explain the wounds inflicted on the person. The inspector was accused of dishonesty and partiality, though he did not want any freelancers to support Alibi's request. female advocates from Hujra Shah Muqeem lawyer