Counsel for the accused accused of section 392 criminal code of conduct (v. 1898), sections 342, 364 (2) and 537 robbery objected to the non-submission of the certificate on the statement of the accused under section 342, the PC certificate was mandatory. (6) The statement of the PC and Section 646464, the accused and the court were present in the statement, but the required certificate was missing from the statement, the accused did not allege that his statement was not present in the court or recorded at the hearing. Was or was not presented by the court. Question from him; that he did not answer this question to the court. That the court did not record the said response at all. Or recorded them incorrectly. Or that he did not sign his statement. Or that the court did not sign it. Or that the record did not contain the complete and true statement presented by the accused, Section 36464, the absence of the required certificate under CRPC, was irregularity which could be fixed under section 373737, CRP. The defendant's lawyer did not object to the lawyer, the circumstances were alleged. Prosecutor's witness at the hospital identified in the presence of the complainant and other prosecutor's witness The complainant and the police officer also supported the version regarding the identification of the accused in the hospital, the evidence of the two persons is consistent with material points. And their evidence contained minor contradictions. No hostility was charged in the unnatural way, false accusations were made against the prosecution witnesses. The complainant's motorcycle was recovered in the presence of the complainant and his son's lawyer argued that Section 103, CRPP
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2014
