Find a Lawyer

BADAR MUNIR versus THE STATE

The evidence presented by the prosecution was not faithfully affected by the recovery of the Motion by the Pakistan Penal Code Sections 302 and 304 and the evidence of the alleged recovery of the theft from the accused was completely incompetent to depend on, the presence of the prosecution witnesses on the site was planned. I was not shown. Evidence on the record shows that the accused was in the hospital 15 minutes before the late arrival of the wounded and the victim's medical examination was done 10 minutes before the prosecution's witnesses did not accept the fact, The fact was produced by documentary evidence and dismissed by a doctor who was an independent witness. The accused not only refused to hurt the prosecution's witness, but he pleaded that the defendant was in fact attacked by the prosecutor's witness and others, causing serious injury. And that he worked in the defendant's self-defense version was not only supported by the evidence presented by the accused in defense, but it also supported the statements of many police officers, Appearing as prosecution witnesses. The prosecution's evidence included interested witnesses, and they appeared suspicious when both the prosecution's version and the defendants had no doubt that the trial of the accused could not be safely relied upon while the defendant's. The version of the source presented, which is likely and closer to the truth, can be safely relied upon in the conviction of the accused under Section 2302; PPC was not able to be retained and instead M criminal advocate from Dunyapur lawyer