Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD RAMZAN versus STATE

Sections 302 (b), 324, 353 and 34 2 of the West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), section 13 (e) of the Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), sections 7, 16 and 19 of the definition of evidence on the basis of doubt. Of the three eyewitnesses and one of the three unidentified FIRs, the names of the accused were not given, even the details and characteristics of the accused were not mentioned. The light of the electric bulb was illuminated at the doors. Neighborhood import consultants did not mention any electric bulbs located at the gates of nearby houses, the Investigating Officer did not say about the existence of any such electric bulbs at the gates of the houses themselves. The alleged encounter was reported at the scene of the crime at the time of the alleged encounter between the accused and the police, where the two sides fired several bullets at Prima Fike. Could see the suspect. Not only a glimpse of the faces of the accused could be seen, neither the names of the accused were mentioned in the FIR nor their details and characteristics were mentioned, hence the prosecution's case was thus primarily the identity of the accused prosecution. Attached to the parade was to find out that there was an identity parade. It was conducted in a transparent and legal manner, and that witnesses had no chance of seeing the suspect before the identification test conditions, however, showed that the witnesses as well as other eyewitnesses had Before seeing the suspect, there was every opportunity and opportunity to see him before. The magistrate taken for the identity test top advocates from Tharo Shah lawyer