STATE versus MUHAMMAD YASIN MEMON ALIAS YASIN MEMON
Section (1) (a) Conduct of Evidence (XLV of 1860), Section 302 Review of the evidence from the convict, The acquisition of true witnesses was a one-day incident that took place on a busy road and resulted in a conviction. Imd was the result of the fire. Due to the injuries sustained, the officer was blamed for the role of firing on both the accused. The trial court sentenced both the accused under Section 302 (b). C read out section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act 1997 and sentenced him to death, but the high court acquitted both the accused. None of the four witnesses testifying was excluded from the evidence and was dismissed for hypothetical and inaccurate reasons, under section 302 (b), with section 7 (1) (a) of the PPC. He was impressed and impressed with the aspects of the case read, which had no material or relevance to the case under section 302 (b) .The evidence of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 by the accused persons, The four eyewitnesses had the element of truth and complete consistency in the testimony of the witnesses, and they were all directly and honestly involved in the reconciliation test, the prosecution's witnesses said. There was no enmity before the liars were removed from the accused. The trial court set aside the judgment passed by the Supreme Court on the conviction of the crime and the two accused were charged with Section 302 (b), Section 7 (1) (A) of the Anti-Terrorism Act under PPC. Convicted of a crime under 1997 appeal was allowed
