Find a Lawyer

MUHMMAD IMRAN versus STATE

Sections 302, 324, and 337F (3) of the West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), witnesses to the prosecution of the testimony of Section 13 evidence, although interested in the affidavit and have a close relationship with him, were against the accused party. Did not produce any irritation or irritation. The witnesses could not be excluded on this score, only the prosecution witnesses passed a close and rigorous examination of the witnesses The evidence of the witnesses was straightforward and clearly credible The accused was clearly named in the FIR. And a special role of firing on the deceased and the witnesses along with the three injured witnesses was naturalistic to those who were present at the scene in connection with the deceased panchayat with and to resolve the dispute between the deceased and the accused. The time, date, location, location and presence of the accused party are acknowledged by the defense as having witnesses. He was. The presence of injured eye witnesses at the scene of the incident was controversial and their evidence, which was untrue, untrustworthy, reliable and unfounded, cannot be denied solely on the basis of the relationship with the complaining party. ? The evidence of the injured eye witnesses and other eyewitnesses was greatly helped by the evidence of the curse, no dispute was found between them. Acquisition of medical version of arms and other articles, evidence of corroborating evidence was provided, the presence of the complaining party, when it was recognized by the defense at the relevant time, the absence of independent witnesses, the prosecution's story. Will not cause any injuries to the person. The prosecution's testimony and its location through the prosecution inheritance advocates near Mirpur Khas lawyer