Find a Lawyer

GHULAM MURTAZA versus STATE

Section 302 (b) definition of evidence was not established by prosecution. No crime was recovered from the accused during the investigation. Medical evidence confirmed the truth of the oral testimony of the police officers involved in defense matters and Had raised serious doubts about the truth. During his interrogation, the accused was found innocent, which also adversely affected the authenticity of the eye, witnesses close to the account failed to establish their presence on the spot at the relevant time, which is allegedly another spectacle. The witness was present who was seen. The prosecution won, indicating that he was not ready to support the prosecution's case against the accused. The ocular evidence did not derive any form of autonomy from any element or circumstance, serious suspicion about the presence of eyewitnesses near the victim. It was alleged at the time of the incident that he had been acquitted best law firm from Kala Shah Kaku lawyer