Find a Lawyer

RUSTAM versus STATE

Section 2302 (b) testimony of Qatil-e-Amad evidence existed when natural and independent eye-witnesses were present and they testified to each other medical evidence fully supported the ocular testimony when eyewitnesses used the crime. ? He was found on the spot and the accused committed the murder of the victim, then he did not need any further trouble. The accused fired three consecutive bullets at the victim, which resulted in no loss of death. The record was available in favor of the accused to justify the lesser punishment and the death sentence was retained

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010

• LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR v. GHULAM AHMAD 2010 YLR 1367
• Mian ARIF HUSSAIN alias MIAN JAVED v. ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, DASKA 2010 YLR 1369
• SHABBIR AHMAD v. State 2010 PCrLJ 1371
• MUHAMMAD ARSHAD v. FAROOQ AHMAD 2010 YLR 1374
• MUHAMMAD SALEEM v. GHULAM DASTGIR 2010 CLC 1376
• GLACIER INTERNATIONAL through Authorized representative v. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS, LAHORE 2010 PTD 1376
• Hafiz SHABBIR HUSSAIN v. D.E.O. 2010 PLC(CS) 1376
• MUHAMMAD SHABBIR v. State 2010 YLR 1379

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2010 →

best advocate from Kotli Loharan lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes