The trial court's denial of the testimony of Section 302 evidence was denied because the prosecutor failed to present any independent person because there was a significant contradiction in the complainant's statement in the FIR and in respect of the injured. Due to such contradiction and improvement by the complainant in his contradictory statement allegedly made by the accused in the alleged statement of the victim, it was proved that the complainant was not present on the occasion He would not have been there if he had been there. His version was changed by the prosecutor's witness, the complainant's daughter, and the victim's real sister, Syed, the prosecution's witness described the escaped suspect as an injury, saying he had no name in the FIR. Was taken and he blamed the victim for both wounds. Both witnesses, who were closely linked to the fraud, were not acquitted of the two accused. Ed did not prove that he was present on the spot and in fact it was an unexpected incident. No trial has been found to prove the crime. And in the face of many doubts in the prosecution's case, the benefit of the doubt was extended to the accused and the convict. He was sentenced by the trial court and ordered to be released soon
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
