Article 302 and 34 Criminal Code of Conduct (V9 1898), Section 417 (2A) Qatel amd, conducting a post-mortem on the body of the deceased 40 minutes before reporting the value of the doubt to the value of a joint intention appeal doubt. The complainant had raised doubts in the prosecution case, the timing of the incident was contradictory to the medical evidence, the complainant did not advance any motive in his preliminary report, but during his judicial statement, The circumstances of the case brought with it an unprecedented improvement, and revealed a motive against the accused, who was denied the investigating officer's case and the facts of the case, as well as in the general account of the complainant. The contradictions led to the conclusion that the incident was not accepted. In the presence of the complainant, and the manner in which he was charged, the accused was a man of weak stature, and could not walk without assistance. Another person; it was incredible that such a person could hold Kalashnikov and carry out a murderous attack. Prosecutor was unable to direct the accused to the house through direct ocular evidence, in the absence of direct evidence, on the spot of evidence of blood recovered from the situation, the victim's blood-stained clothing, forensic science laboratory Due to the contradictory piece of evidence, the prosecution will not get any help, from the fact that the accused is absconding. When the eyewitnesses did not establish his presence on the occasion. And his testimony was based on suspicion and contention of material contradictions.
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2015
