Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ASIM IQBAL versus STATE

Article 4 364A, 2 302 (b) and ??? ????? Appreciation of evidence, reduction of sentence No one noticed that the murderer committed the action by throwing the missing chip into the canal, the body of the deceased child was not found Nor was it reported. Post-mortem examination was on record No one noticed that the perpetrators of the crime of murder were disappeared with the intention of screening themselves with legal punishment, no one was mentioned as a criminal in the FIR The magistrate did not record the accused's judicial confession as required by law. And ignored several requirements in this regard. The evidence last seen was irrelevant as there was no closeness between the time the victim was seen with the accused and the time when he was allegedly thrown into the canal by the accused. It can only be considered when confirming other independent evidence on material points, which was proved by the evidence of the prosecution in the present case, in connection with the abduction of the complainant's minor son at the age of seven by the accused. According to the record, which was taking the child to his place without his father's permission, the record proved that the accused had abducted the minor son, either to kill the complainant or to detain him. To risk killing her. The offender was convicted under Section 64 Section AA, but in the specific circumstances of the PCC, his conviction was reduced to ten years. However, he was acquitted of the charges under Sections 302 (b) and 201, PPC best law firms from Issa Khel lawyer