Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD YOUSAF versus STATE

Section 497 (2) of the Conduct Code (XLV of 1860), Sections 392 and 395 bail, further inquiry into the case was filed with the grant of FIR with a delay of two days The accused's name was not listed in the FIR , But his name came up in this case. In the supplemental statement given by the complainant six days after the alleged incident, for the first time, the complainant allegedly told the complainant on the basis of additional judicial confession jointly made by the two accused. The joint extra-judicial confession was in no way degrading. In the FIR, the complainant of the Identification Price had specifically nominated three criminals, in his supplementary statement, pardoned the culprits and instead introduced five others, including the accused, because during the investigation of the accused The stolen article was not recovered. Although a pistol was recovered from the suspect's custody during the investigation, nothing was initially recovered, according to the investigating records linked to it, alleging that the pistol had already been investigated for the alleged crime. Has been completed and under Section 173, CR PC, the report was submitted by the police and it was clearly recorded in the report that the accused was never admitted. In the house where the alleged incident took place and the accused continued to stand in the street case against the accused during this incident, Section Section497 sought further investigation into his crime under sub-section (2) of the CCPC. There, he was admitted on bail under the circumstances criminal advocate from Wazirabad lawyer