Section 2 (b (b)) of the evidence was appreciated by the complainant for the delay, not seven hours after the report of the police report to the police station but at a square where the police officer was present at every opportunity. Undoubtedly suspected that the FI siege was not recorded at the police station, which was recorded on the spot after the interrogation, the ocular account was lied to by medical evidence, no crime has been cleared by chance. There is no independent witness associated with the recovery proceedings, the alleged retaliation of the firearm on the occasion of the accused was not the result of the motion. The evidence of the prosecution was not credible The incident was a non-witness and after knowing about the murder of the victim, the whole story of the prosecution was made. The accused was acquitted.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
