Find a Lawyer

NASEEB ULLAH versus STATE

The testimony of Section 2 (2 (b)) was the father of the complainant and the other prosecution witnesses were related to the enmity between the accused witnesses and the accused. Faith had improved and said that after learning about the post-mortem report of the prosecution's witnesses bringing their evidence in compliance with the medical evidence, both witnesses have made unprecedented improvements to the weapons case. The story in the FIR was dismissed and the prosecution's witnesses were present at the time of the incident. This is reflected in both the prosecution's witnesses who repeated each other on all material points. On the evidence record, the record established that the prosecution's witness was not present at the time of the incident. It cannot be said that there was an FIR filed at the time, which was reflected in the FIR. This contradicts the version given in the FIR Prose. May have succeeded, but no independent witness was presented to support the recovery of the weapons. Maybe because he was not sent to forensic science laboratory nor empty. The incident was recovered, the witnesses were not credible and the prosecution case was also without doubt, the trial court allowed the appeal, the judgment was set aside, the accused was acquitted of all charges, and They were released. power of attorney advocate Blitang lawyer