Section 302 (b) commended the prosecutor's witness, who was presented as an eyewitness to the FIR and claimed to be present on the occasion when the incident occurred, except for the incomplete description of the offender. To identify, the identity attacker or he may identify the offender who committed the crime. Syed witness did not identify the culprit during the identification parade. According to the power of the statement in his statement, Syed witness denied the suggestion that he had seen the culprit before. The offender knew about it, there was no room for him to believe that he said the witness's statement had the capability to identify the defendant, the prosecution's other witness, The person who claimed to be an eyewitness was not presented as an eyewitness to the FIR because the contradictions in his statements could not be relied upon by the statements of the two witnesses of the prosecution. Was the reception beyond reasonable doubt the reason for the accused being charged, and the defense was reasonable in producing sketches in the prosecution's case and the appeal was overturned? Conversely, the judgment approved by the trial court was set aside, the accused acquitted and released. , Under the circumstances
Related judgments — Quetta High Court Balochistan, 2013
