Find a Lawyer

TARIQ versus STATE

Section 2 302 (b) filed the definition of evidence after the FIR was delayed eighteen hours, turning the factual facts of the matter into an unreliable explanation, which means that either he He had not seen the incident or admitted it. The ocular testimony presented by the witnesses interested in the murder proceedings was not verified by any independent evidence; the accused was acquitted by the trial court, the case was not proved, the prosecution 'S story seemed highly unlikely and suspected. He was acquitted

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2012

• SAKHI MUHAMMAD v. ASHRAF ALI 2012 CLC 1581
• MUHAMMAD AKHLAQ v. State 2012 MLD 1582
• ALLAH DITTA v. Z.T.B.L. HEAD OFFICE AT ISLAMABAD 2012 CLD 1582
• Mian MUHAMMAD ASLAM v. State 2012 PCrLJ 1591
• Mst. NASEEM AKHTAR v. SHAHZAD MASIH 2012 CLC 1597
• MUHAMMAD MUMTAZ v. State 2012 YLR 1603
• MUHAMMAD INAYAT v. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, PHALIA 2012 MLD 1605
• KHALID PERVAIZ v. MUHAMMAD BASHIR 2012 YLR 1607

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2012 →

advocate from Phalia lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes