Section 2 30b (b) Appraising evidence The benefit of the doubt was that both alleged witnesses failed to establish their presence on the spot and to prove the alleged incident and incident in the FIR. The incident, their testimony, which was otherwise subjected to material contradictions and contradictions, did not provide any co-operation with the site's plans, medical evidence. And the other circumstances of the incident cannot be believed and cannot be relied upon to record the sentence, the trial court committed suicide in the encounter. And came to an unfair conclusion from the evidence on record. No weapon of crime was recovered from the indirect or indirect possession of the accused. Neither accused had confessed to his crime before a competent court of law, reports of guilt, blood on the spot and blood stains of the victim's blood. In the absence of direct and concrete evidence, which the court denied. It would not be sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused. Such pieces of evidence were considered as corroborative evidence, which were taken with direct and concrete evidence and were not done in isolation. The authenticity of the evidence was to be examined, which is both admissible and ocular evidence. On the one hand, he remained steadfast, on the one hand he remained steadfast, while on the other hand, he did not appeal to the intelligent mind, the prosecution's suspicions were based on suspicion. And it was filled with very serious and debilitating illnesses. Prosecutors failed to bring the accused's guilt home to the suspects with cautious and confident evidence beyond doubt.
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2015
