Sections 302 (b), 324 and 337a (iv) attempt to commit murder amid, murder MM, which resulted in the benefit of the doubt at the time of suspicion, but not the value of the Shuja i and Monqilah evidence. Neither the complainant nor the prosecution witnesses said a word about the availability of light source in the vicinity of the crime scene, nor any electric bulbs were recovered nor occupied. Gone, so in the dark hours of the night the suspect would be identified, in the most suspicious case, when both the complainant and the prosecution witness, not only had a very close relationship with each other, but The domestic dispute also alleged that the two were eyewitnesses. Not only interested, but also many other people accused of testifying for the incident against the accused factum, but the complainant did not investigate any of these persons. The SS had completely negated the complainant's version by medical evidence to prove the complainant's version, and the prosecution witness alleged that the suspect was a harsh and frustrated criminal who quarreled with people in the area. But nothing of this nature was disclosed in the FIR, no blood was recovered from the place of the alleged complainant, consistent with the contradictory and medical evidence presented by both the complainant and the prosecution witness. As well as other conditions. The incident, which led to serious doubts about their presence and event and procedure, as allegedly suppressed by the complainant for material facts.
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2015
