Find a Lawyer

ILYAS versus STATE

Sections 392 and 34 Benefit from Doubts From Actions by Many Persons in the Offering of Joint Intent, Contravening Medical and Molecular Evidence Delay recording of statements and site not inspected. The investigating officer did not recover any stolen motorcycle or criminal weapon. The prosecution failed to prove that the accused's action was allegedly a crime but the sequence of events described by the prosecution was not logical, the complainant could not explain the reason for his efforts to settle the injury. The contradictions and contradictions in the evidence of the trial were not considered by the trial court to be an offense under section 392; , The appeal was accepted. Before being acquitted of the charge

Related judgments — Quetta High Court Balochistan, 2011

• CHAKAR ALI KHAN RIND v. GOVERNMENT OF BALOCHISTAN through Secretary 2011 CLC 601
• NAZAR MUHAMMAD v. NIAZ MUHAMMAD 2011 CLC 615
• JAMSHED KHAN v. State 2011 PCrLJ 669
• MUHAMMAD ANWAR v. State 2011 PCrLJ 711
• Haji DAD MUHAMMAD v. MUSLIM COMMERCIAL BANK LIMITED 2011 CLD 785
• NADIL JAN v. State 2011 PCrLJ 825
• Dr. MUHAMMAD YOUNAS v. GOVERNMENT OF BALOCHISTAN, HEALTH DEPARTMENT 2011 PLC(CS) 863
• AZIZULLAH v. State 2011 MLD 950

All Quetta High Court Balochistan judgments of 2011 →

immigration advocates contact from Kasur lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes