Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD KHAN versus STATE

Defining the evidence of section 2302 (b) created confidence in the evidence of the accused involved fully in the murder of the two victims and, despite the enmity between the parties, the prosecution's witnesses issued the air in the name of the accused. Tickets can be safely relied upon. It will not establish the alibi's plea taken by him and will not disclose the entire testimony it has confirmed, in which case he has been charged under section 13 (c) of the West Pakistan Arms, Ordinance, 1965. The allegations were obtained only on the basis of technical aspects. The minor contradictions in the evidence of the prosecutor were not significant, the trial and the conviction of the accused were retained.

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2010

• Syed SHARIF HUSSAIN SHAH v. Mst. SAMINA TAUSIF 2010 CLC 637
• SHAH MURAD BROHI v. BASHIR AHMED 2010 YLR 641
• NISHAT BEGUM v. SINDH KATCHI ABADI AUTHORITY 2010 MLD 644
• NIZAMUDDIN v. State 2010 YLR 646
• IMTIAZ ALI v. State 2010 MLD 651
• NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN v. NAYA DOUR MOTORS (PVT.) LTD. 2010 CLC 654
• ZAHID HUSSAIN v. State 2010 PCrLJ 654
• SHAHRUKH ENTERPRISES through Proprietor v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Islamabad 2010 PTD 657

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2010 →

top advocates from Orakzai lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes