Find a Lawyer

ZAHID PERVAIZ versus STATE

Sections 4 324, 7i7f (ii) and ii7f (iii) Evidence of any person committing a murder, umrah and study committing the evidence was compiled by the prosecution on the basis of the ongoing dispute over murder. The motive was ambiguous and uncertain and did not yield the same result, no weapons were recovered from the possession of the accused during the interrogation and the accused was sentenced under trial and the lower appellate court also sentenced him. Was. Medical evidence did not benefit from the legality of the High Court because they were not attributed to a particular type of injury that could help with medical evidence, so the perpetrators of the accused need not be exempt. The accused was tried and convicted by the lower courts and acquitted of the charge. Appeal allowed

Related judgments — Supreme Court, 2012

• TAJ v. State 2012 SCMR 43
• CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB v. SHAFIQUE AHMAD CHAUDHRY 2012 SCMR 45
• PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Collector/DOR District Chakwal v. BAZ KHAN 2012 SCMR 51
• Mst. NASEEM AKHTAR v. G.M. (P & D) WATER, WAPDA 2012 SCMR 54
• AHMED JAN v. NASRULLAH 2012 SCMR 59
• TRUSTEES OF THE PORT OF KARACHI v. SAQIB SAMDANI 2012 SCMR 64
• Major MUHAMMAD KHALID KARIM v. Mst. SAADIA YAQUB 2012 PLD 66
• MUHAMMAD YOUSAF v. State 2012 SCMR 68

All Supreme Court judgments of 2012 →

best law firm from Tando Jam lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes