Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD AFZAL versus STATE

Section 2 (2 (b)) praised nature for the incident in the sunlight was designated with a special role in the FIR, that he fired his rifle b44 from the bore when he He was shot in the back while walking, causing the doctor to confirm that the victim died from a gunshot wound. The presence of eye witnesses led to unnecessary medical conflicts with the account regarding distance distances. I was found on which the victim suffered a gunshot wound to the isolate. The dead were shot dead from a distance of 80 kms. Eyewitness statements have revealed that the deceased was found in a Yaga was fired from a distance, while the doctor observed that he did not heal the wounds burnt could not be resolved in favor of prosecuting such contradiction - and this fact would only benefit the accused. Enough was enough that the guilty verdict was denied and the accused was acquitted of his charge and released.

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2015

• FARZANA ROOHI v. DIVISIONAL SUPERINTENDENT, PAKISTAN RAILWAYS 2015 PLC 101
• MUHAMMAD YASIN v. MUHAMMAD JAMIL 2015 PLD 103
• FATEH MUHAMMAD v. GHULAM HASSAN 2015 MLD 105
• MUNAWAR HUSSAIN SHAH v. PRIVATISATION COMMISSION 2015 PLC 107
• YOUNG DOCTORS ASSOCIATION v. GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN 2015 PLD 112
• MUHAMMAD AKRAM v. State 2015 YLR 116
• GHAFFAR-UL-HASSAN v. NATIONAL COMMAND AUTHORITY 2015 PLC(CS) 117
• COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE v. TARIQ MEHMOOD 2015 PTD 120

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2015 →

us immigration advocates from Kabir Wala lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes