Find a Lawyer

NADEEM ASIF ALIAS MITHU versus STATE

Sections 302 (b), 324, 337a (i), 148 and 149 convictions of evidence, the reduction in the two versions of the case was reported to the police after a 12-hour incident while the police station was at a distance of 15 The evidence and the documentary evidence stated by Dr. Storey in the FIR did not support the explanation provided in the filing of the FIR with sufficient delay presented by the complainant; the defense was not credible so that The record evidence should be considered credible to prove the incident. The witnesses did not relate to the recovery of the guns on the accused's information and the two properties that were seized on the occasion, since the guns were kept empty at the police station. And the two were sent to the forensic science laboratory facts that were brought together on the record revealed that the prosecutor did not come up with the whole truth, the defense was requested, the defense's statement received the support of this limitation. Until the complaining party, which was the assailant, the defense witness did not believe that the fire was accidental or deliberate, the two sides did not come out with the whole truth. Initially there was a dispute between the accused and the complaining party. Then the situation got worse when the accused was used. His gun was used under section 2302 (b), section 2302 (b), PPC under PPC and his sentence was reduced to 14 years RI, benefit of section 382b. In addition, CCPC was one of the co-accused who was already serving his sentence, was released, the other co-accused remained in jail for about three to three years and four months. famous lower court advocate from Nawab Shah lawyer