Find a Lawyer

HAZRAT ALI SHAH versus STATE

Use of derogatory remarks in relation to section 295C Hazrat Akram of Definition of Evidence Remarks Diagnostic Remarks The accused was convicted by the trial court and no Muslim was convicted under Section 295C, PPC. Can go Death when he explicitly denied the allegation and claimed that he was a true Muslim and could not even think of such an act, in the present case the accused cannot be punished because the prosecution has more Most witnesses denied each other's presence on the spot. At the time of the incident, no mention of the prosecution witnesses' records was recorded to substantiate the fact that the evidence presented by the prosecutor was untrustworthy and could not be relied upon for sentencing on a capital charge. Was convicted and sentenced by the trial court, and the accused acquitted. Under the circumstances, a charge appeal was allowed

Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2014

• Syed MUBASHIR HUSSAIN SHAH v. Syeda SALMA BATOOL KAZMI 2014 PLD 113
• Haji ABDUL HAMID KHAN v. AMANULLAH JAN KHATTAK 2014 MLD 113
• ATTIQ ALI v. State 2014 PLD 116
• SHAH JAHAN KHAN v. STATE BANK OF PAKISTAN through Governor 2014 YLR 120
• Mst. RIFFAT YASMEEN v. HASSAN DIN 2014 CLC 126
• MUHAMMAD AKRAM alias MUHAMMAD IKRAM v. State 2014 MLD 127
• MIAN KHAN v. State 2014 PLD 127
• ABDUL BARI v. DIRECTOR, LIVESTOCK, DAIRY DEVELOPMENT, FATA 2014 PLD 132

All Peshawar High Court NWFP judgments of 2014 →

immigration advocates from Nilore lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes