Find a Lawyer

NASIR ALI versus STATE

Section 302 (b) / 34 Qatl e amd The testimony of testimony, the reduction of the incident occurred at a moment when the accused had only one blow to the prosecuting prosecutor's head as he extended his version. Did not offer The prosecution's witnesses witnessed the incident and had no reason to make false statements against the accused. Ocular testimony could not be dismissed simply because of the relationship of the witnesses, when the victim Sota recovered on the suspect's disclosure. Recovery of the weapon with blood was reinforced by the prosecution's version, so maintained that the previous rivalry between the parties did not exist at the time, which led to the presence of anger in the accused's mind. An hour before the incident, the victim was sentenced to life imprisonment for causing injury to the victim in isolation, even though the victim had the opportunity to repeat the blow.

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2012

• ALLAH DITTA v. LAHORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY 2012 CLC 271
• MUHAMMAD SADIQ v. AYAZ MEHMOOD 2012 PLD 273
• JEEWAY PAKISTAN WORKERS UNION through General Secretary v. PUNJAB LABOUR APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, LAHORE 2012 PLC 276
• SHAMSHAD BIBI v. DISTRICT JUDGE, MULTAN 2012 YLR 277
• SHAHZAD TARIQ v. SECRETARY SCHOOLS (EDUCATION DEPARTMENT) GOVERNMENT OF PNJAB 2012 PLC(CS) 284
• TEHSIL MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, ISA KHEL through Muhammad Yaqoob Khan v. SHAFI ULLAH KHAN 2012 PLC 284
• MUHAMMAD SARWAR v. AHMAD KHAN 2012 CLC 284
• MUHAMMAD TARIQ v. ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, DUNYAPUR 2012 PCrLJ 285

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2012 →

best advocate from Adda Jahan Khan lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes