Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ARSHAD versus STATE

Section 2302 (b), the definition of evidence was disputed by the location of the incident; the complaining party was not aware of the actual culprit till night; after deliberation and consultation the FIR did not file an apology. Had gone, none of the witnesses had seen that the co-accused had been acquitted. The same claim of witnesses that the accused was jointly accused of, which was not a credible and plausible correction, after which the witnesses raised serious doubts about their fact in order to strengthen the prosecution's case. So that there would be evidence to maintain the conviction. Free and unreliable sources, but in the present case the same was brought about by the deceitful and unrealistic witnesses without any independent design. Medical evidence contradicted the controversial account of the incident, the fatal injuries suspect was acquitted, and no crime was left vacant. Neither the incident nor the weapon of the crime, such as being recovered from the accused, was always a double weapon and in the present case the complaining party had the intention of falsely trapping the accused and acquitting his family members in the situation. had gone. law websites from Murree lawyer