Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ISHFAQ JAMIL versus STATE

Section 540 Constitutional Code (XLV of 1860), Section 324/379/396/452/337 H (ii) / 148/149 Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Pakistan Constitution of Section 7 (1973), Article 199 Constitution After recording the entire plea of additional pleading witnesses and the record prosecution, which took more than three years, the complainant filed a petition seeking further testimony and records which were therefore dismissed by the trial court. Was that the said evidence was irrelevant and not necessary for fairness and justice by deciding the prosecution's evidence consisting of twenty witnesses, for the purpose of already seeking additional evidence. He may have been established, further delays may prolong the suffering of the accused in the trial who were undergoing trial. Over the past three years, the trial court had to determine which evidence was necessary and which was not necessary, considering the facts, the circumstances of the ES and the parties had decided positively that The evidence presented had no significant effect in determining the guilt or innocence of the accused; the discretion used by the trial court during the trial was neither declared arbitrary nor irrational. The request was rejected within limits female advocates from Ubaro lawyer