Find a Lawyer

BAHAR ALI versus STATE

Section 497 Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Section 21D (2) (3) and (4) Code of Conduct (XLV of 1860), Section 365A / 342/171/148/149 Guarantee, Crimes of Highway robbery. The complainant, the abductor and the ransom for the quality of the abduction and the investigator of the present case, have been involved in passionate and dynamic activity to permanently and substantially expose the wrongdoers in this case, but none of the accused is allegedly involved. Offering a record of solid evidence to add to his crime is also a basic preliminary duty of the investigator, although both the complainant and the investigator were not law experts and it could be true that Unaware of the required scale, but it was equally true that the complainant's lack of legal knowledge or the little knowledge of the investigating officer could not prove to be an excuse for obstructing the use of guns in the safe administration of justice, in criminal cases. Prosecutors, in such cases, may suffer at times, but the robbery cannot allow any court of justice to overturn the principles of the defendant's innocence, unless his guilt is beyond doubt. In the absence of such evidence, and only in the absence of evidence of such quality, will the delinquency of the crime increase its sentence? There is, at the end of the trial, reasonable grounds to believe that the accused persons are guilty of a non-bailable offense, as required by section 21D, if necessary in the interest of justice, given the facts and circumstances of a particular case. (2) contained in the provisions of Lack of any other preventative element, as indicated in Sections 21 DKCLS (3) and (4) of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 tax advocates from Muzaffarabad lawyer