NAZAR MUHAMMAD versus STATE
Witnesses 22, 34, 7, 307/34 & 3 323 witnesses were closely related to the confessional witnesses, but the presence of their wounds was attributed to the incident. It was beyond any reasonable doubt that even the defense did not deny the presence of witnesses. On the occasion, there was no background of enmity between the witnesses. There was no background of enmity between the parties. The complainant filed an FIR immediately giving all the details of the occurrence of the incident so there could be no dispute, the ocular evidence was straightforward, truthful and confidently defended. Injuries suffered by the accused could not go ahead.
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
advocate for immigration from Killa Saifullah lawyer
