Articles 2 (2 (b) and Q 34 Qalim Um, sentencing of the joint intention evidence testimony, were promptly reported to the FIR with all the necessary details of the incident, which led to the conciliation of the prosecution parties or The possibility of discussion was eliminated - the participants were residents of the village and knew each other before the incident, the replacement of the culprits for the actual assailants was unbelievable, as no one expected the father of the deceased's aged father. Could have substituted the actual culprits with the accused, otherwise it would have been an extraordinary event, blood-stained land, X, and the last stained blood clot of the victims, were sent to the Franzic Science Laboratory for a serologist's opinion analyst's report, which confirmed that it was human blood, and the same group; It was proved that the deceased was executed at the same place as the complainant had proved in his report, in the circumstances, material pieces of evidence of the circumstances had been established solely by pieces. The post-mortem report proved that he was late. Fire washed away with weapons. The effective firing role was assigned to the accused persons, the complainant who was the sole witness to the incident, presented a general account. He was subjected to cross-examination for a long time, but he remained in his position and successfully passed the cross-examination, no material contradictions or defenses could be drawn from the defense testimony, the location and location of the incident. Other details of this include a subpoena for a witness of loneliness
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2015
