Find a Lawyer

SHAH NAWAZ versus STATE

Section 2 (2 (b) / evidence 34) conviction of evidence, the number of accused before the prosecution witnesses of the ocular account, the firearms used in the commission of the murder, the time and place of the accused. The testimony of both witnesses cannot be ruled out on the basis that they belonged to the deceased because the mere fact of the witnesses will not have to present their events in doubt. There was no motive involved. The witnesses could not be termed interesting witnesses, although it was true that the accused was involved in several cases, but the witness There was no basis for rejecting Haddin's testimony and the number and quantity of witnesses was not relevant because no witness was presented from the eligible area, it cannot be said that the prosecution was not able to prove its case, It was to be seen that people do not usually come forward to give evidence in such cases because of fear of enmity from any party, medical evidence also corroborates the ocular evidence presented by the prosecution's two witnesses. Was not recovered from this location. At the time of the incident, the recovery of the pistol on the suspect's identity was filed immediately after the incident, while within half an hour of the incident playing the accused, it was alleged that he had arrested Alibi. The possibility of making a false accusation was eliminated, that he was admitted to the hospital and remains under attack. The behavior was unacceptable because it was a thought that said that the alibi request was not accepted by the accused during the investigation, solicitors from Tibba Sultanpur lawyer