Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD AKRAM versus STATE

Crimes Against Property (Enforcement Hodg) Ordinance 1979 Section 17 (4) Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 203F (2b) The reasons given by the trial court for excluding the accused were not only valid but also valid. According to them, even with the accepted rule of criminal jurisprudence that the confessional statement could only be used as a piece of evidence to prove the prosecution's view, the trial court rightly found that the defendant's confessional statement was voluntary. And he cannot stand with the prosecution's case observation. The Federal Shariat Court held that the accused did not accuse the police of any misconduct before recording his confessional statement, which was based on a false statement of the evidence on record, when the trial took place. When read with evidence, serious questioning arose from the prosecution's evidence. There was no serious trial court's decision by the Federal Shariat Court regarding the voluntary nature of its confessional statement, and no trial was dismissed for trial court remand for writing the verdict, which resulted in a federal law court ruling. The order was declared separately. family advocate from Pak Pattan Sharif lawyer