Find a Lawyer

GHULAM HAIDER versus THE STATE

Section 302/34 was confirmed by ocular evidence in which serologists reported that clothes and weapons had been stained with human blood. The accused refused to give evidence on the oath of allegations against them. Consequently, it was alleged that he did not challenge the sentence under Section 302/34, PPC. And on the basis of the sentence being requested, it is not known who caused the fatal injury to the deceased and the victim was killed in provocation when he not only refused to hand the accused to his daughter. But also removed the accused party from the house. In no evidence did it prove that the first information was not reported at the time and place as it was intended, nor was it listed after the investigation. The first information contained the names and names of the accused. The names of the witnesses, the weapons carried by the accused, and the portion contained in their presence. Eyewitnesses allege they have no enmity to falsely include them. The feminists gave a reasonable reason for their presence at the scene of the incident and successfully met with scrutiny of witness statements. Wanted and was materially relevant to the case and the accused, fully connected with the collateral and recovery evidence, has been convicted of the crime family advocate from Kamokey lawyer