Find a Lawyer

SHAKEEL versus THE STATE

The Pakistan Penal Code Section 397/34 complainant had no inclination to make false allegations against the accused that the complainant's statement about this heinous crime was the arrest of the accused and the recovery of the allegedly seized car. Was proved by The statement of false implications taken by the accused through the commission of the crime and the statement of the injured complainant was not supported by any evidence, the accused persons were arrested within a few hours of the commission of the crime which It is clear that they were not using the controversial car. A stolen property as alleged by the accused. In fact, they were taking the injured complainant to the car after being thrown from the car when he was arrested. The accused failed to contend with the version of the prosecution, which was coming from highly independent and natural witnesses. That the defense evidence was general and the case did not go forward, the prosecution's evidence was a trust affidavit and a complainant who specifically told the court that it was the accused who snatched it at gunpoint. Lee was, the accused was convicted under Section 7397 / under PP, PPC law was sufficiently permissible under the offense and The sentence imposed on the accused by the trial court was upheld best advocate from Lakimarwat lawyer