Section 302 (b) / 34 Qatl e amd, The common intention evidence was that the benefit of the doubt was the same as that of the accused in the role of the accused, who was acquitted on the benefit of the doubt to prove the prosecution's charge. No evidence was presented for the motion, it cannot be proved that the motive in this case was proved, based solely on the imagination of the prosecution witnesses, the trial court overturned the prosecution's indictment and rifle on the indictment. , They were put together. In the police station, and on the spot, safe spaces were submitted to the Franzic Science Laboratory's office 19 days after the alleged rifle retrieval because the crime weapon (rifle) and the blanks were kept in the police station for preparation. False comparisons of possibilities with a rifle cannot be ruled out in this case. It was not safe to rely on the alleged retrieval of a forensic science laboratory prosecution evidence rifle and a positive report from the forensic science laboratory, a controversial piece of evidence against the accused cannot be considered. The case of the accused was not related to the case of the accompanying accused on the basis of the medical evidence. The evidence of the prosecution, which had already been disbelieved against the accompanying accused, could not be ascertained against the accused without independent cross-examination. In this case, the sentence is very lacking. And the trial court convicted the accused, he was set aside to extend the benefit of the suspect, the accused was acquitted and released, in the circumstances.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2013
