Find a Lawyer

SAIF-UL-ISLAM versus STATE

Sections 302 (b) / 34, 324/34 and 337f (iii) / 34 constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3) were held on account of ocular, credible and credible affidavit to the complainant. Injuries during There was enmity between the parties before the present presence and therefore there was no possibility of making false allegations on the accused. Medical evidence confirmed the ocular testimony; It was brought back by the police and it was announced. The defendant's failure to explain his absence was also a serious case against him when the defendant's request for absence at the time of the incident was of no value and his co-accused had three bayes. Sinners were killed and five witnesses injured and did not deserve any restraint. The decision did not involve any unlawful interference or weakness in the decision. Was denied ask a advocate free from Timergara lawyer