Section 449 Explosive Material Stances Act (VI of 1908), Section 41 Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Section 7 (a) Defining Evidence, Reducing Mode of Evidence to Much of Defendant's Witness and Rejecting Its Prosecution Not enough to do. The way to attack by the assailants Although all the accused were acquitted by the trial court while the evidence against them was all the same, it could not be denied that the principle of hunger strike was legally recognized. had gone. Criminal Jurisprudence When the situation was not clear enough to establish criminal responsibility, then the fact that the courts needed to discover the truth was that within their domain, they were good enough to stop the grain from prosecuting the real culprits. Assign responsibility. In the circumstances, the witnesses, through direct, robust and coherent evidence of the witnesses, established their case against the accused, which was legally certified, including medical evidence, in the trial, against the accused. The sentence was properly entered, however, and was guilty of the first order dealing with crimes such as theft, illicit weapons, stolen property, drugs, attempted murder. , Police encounters, etc. There was also a serious dispute over the occupation of the house with the accused, and his father was a notorious man and was involved in a large number of criminal cases. The Central Government's provision for life imprisonment was a condition of the defendant's trial for a crime against the Explosives Act, 1908, which was prohibited in the case under the Explosive Substances Act, 1908. Under Section 4, the accused were convicted. Q
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2009
