Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD BOHRA versus THE STATE

Sections 233, 494, 239 and 537 ?? Panel Code (XLV of 1860), 5 302/34 ?? \ r \ n Complaint Case and Invoice Case, Trial? After the conclusion of the complainant's evidence in the complaint case, the trial court did not summon the prosecution witnesses in the challan case as a prosecution witness, but the prosecutor's witnesses in the challan case sought as the defense witness at the request of the accused. While deciding the case? After the conclusion of the complainant's evidence in the complaint case, the evidence deferred for defense of the case ?? The accused did not object, instead appealed the prosecution witnesses in the challan case to seek their defense witnesses. ??? Examination of the witnesses of the prosecution of the challan case as a defense witness is unlikely to be biased in the case of the accused and the trial court's failure to follow the procedure laid down in Noor Divya Case PLD 1966 SC 706 By the way, the accused in the case of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, PLD 1979 SC 53 \ r \ n, had no chance of failing justice. top advocate from Pirpai lawyer