Section 2 30at Trial AMD Proof Definition Benefit of Suspicion Supplementary Statement Increasing Number of Suspects Trial Identification Parade, Trial Court sentenced three accused while medical evidence failed while the remaining two were sentenced to life imprisonment. In the FIR, two people were named as assailants, but in the supplementary statement, while the increasing number of suspects, three persons were named in the supplementary statement sufficient to state the number of attackers themselves. The two incidents did not occur in the style and fashion described. Or the complainant and witnesses did not conduct the incident by unknown persons, so conducting the identification test was necessary but no such identification test was conducted. Medical evidence was also banned and did not provide coordination because according to the contents of the FIR, only one shot was fired by a boy, but the post-mortem report suggested three injuries, Two had internal wounds and one external wound FIR was silent on how the injury to the second entry was sustained late by the middle side of the left elbow, capable of convincing the prosecution to prove the crime. And failed to present impressive evidence of conviction, raising both the accused beyond doubt and the benefit of the doubt. But it was not as a matter of grace and privileges, but the High Court raised the benefit of the doubt as a valid case both the accused and the trial was convicted by a court sentence. And they were acquitted of the charge, in which case an appeal was allowed
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2013
