GUL KHAN versus STATE
Articles 2302 and 7 307 of the Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3) of the High Court rejected the ocular testimony without any legal justification, especially when eyewitnesses disclosed all relevant facts and their relationship or past enmity. The evidence was appreciated if it was never hidden. It was the job of the High Court that was properly performed, unless some evidence at a crucial point resulted from a misreading or a mistrial of the law or a miscarriage of justice from the fact, there was no case for leave of appeal.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
jobs for advocates from Dargai lawyer
