Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD JAVID versus THE STATE

Section 302/34/324 was the cause of a dispute that occurred between the accused and the victim the day before the incident, but the prosecutor could not prove that the accused had no intention of killing the prosecution, who was involved with the prosecution's witness. Had taken The version of the accused, who died from his house to the bazaar in an attempt to dispel serious doubts over his case, is that he suffered serious injuries but was detained by police the day before and He did not have a medical examination that both of them look incredible. The parties did not come up with the correct version of the incident and each of them tried not only to downplay his character but also to exaggerate the final role of the witness's presence as He had neither attempted to rescue the deceased nor raised any alarm. It can only be reasonably inferred that this incident appears to be one-sided and dead-on, and on the other hand, the prosecution's witnesses quarreled with each other on the issue that took place on that occasion. The defendant was able to strike a blow to the deceased and the prosecutor's witness was suddenly hurt due to which there was no previous enmity between the parties which the complainant had entered into. The exam was chosen to injure the thigh of the suspect, an unimportant part of the body, and was not repeatedly hit. The death was caused by injury to the popliteal vessels. The accused had no intention of killing the accused. The person was not aware that such injury could result in death of the victim, best advocate from Mandi Bahauddin lawyer