Find a Lawyer

ZIA ALIAS AHMI versus STATE

The testimony of the witnesses at the time of appreciation of the evidence 2302 (b) and 9449 was natural and they maintained that the accused targeted the deceased woman and failed her attempt. Killed her. Ocular testimony was proved by the recovery of the weapons of crime, the evacuation of crime from the scene of the incident, the presence of spectacular witnesses at the time, place and time of the controversial death of the deceased, wearing the last clothes and blood stained. And even with the use of the weapon of his rifle, there was a different version of the incident, which was neither likely nor credible, and there was sudden outrage that was mentioned by the complainant. Nothing was presented on the record to prove that he could be compelled to kill his wife. On the contrary, the record shows that the complainant and the deceased were living a normal family life with the two children if the complainant gave his wife for the reasons presented. Had to be killed. Why would he do so through an accused when he could have done so at night in the presence of other people, especially the accused, when none of the prosecution was present, and therefore, was a reliable convict and in the circumstances of the accused? The sentence was retained. top civil advocates from Adda Shaiwala lawyer