Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ARSHAD versus STATE

Appreciation of the evidence of Articles 302 (b) and 377 law marriages (10 of 1984), Article 20 Evidence Despite the gravity of the incident, investigators and medical officers did not consider it necessary to obtain a mini-sample of the accused during medical treatment. ? Money mapping may have raised the issue by examining her sexuality, but the prosecutor chose to relinquish this aspect, though Conan's testimony was admissible under Article 20 of 1984 , But this was evidence of a weakening circumstance No possible evidence was available on the basis of the conviction that the victim and the accused were seen together before the incident, leaving the nearby village at the scene of the incident. Located on a public road where a sodomy crime was committed at a place between 11am and 30am. Proximity to Abdi Deah, presumably not committed, the prosecutor was unable to assert responsibility for the crime directly or the current evidence does not support the prosecution's story Last evidence was not confirmed in the investigation. Lack of seriousness Medical opinion did not support public testimony At the time of death was not fully proven The burden of proof was not removed by the prosecution The version of the prosecution was improved The suspect's case sank into mystery The accused was acquitted on the benefit of the doubt and was released in the circumstances. property advocate from Karachi lawyer