The testimony of section 2 (2 (b)) of any delay in reporting the matter to the police was not mentioned in the story of Waj Tucker in column 4 by the police, in the name of the witnesses of Tak Waj Takar. Was prepared after an inspection on the spot, and these points were not mentioned in any site plan, as well as evidence of the prosecution of the prosecutor in the Scale Site Plan. The evidence was not worth relying on, no vacancy was recovered from the site of the incident, and no report from the Franz Science Laboratory was in the record, the recovery proves The closure was of a contradictory nature, and the defendant's sentence could not be sustained solely on account of such recovery, but the motive was not mentioned in the FIR, but was introduced by the complainant's supplementary statement, I was sued, but the prosecution failed to prove the motive because the person against the accused was not enough to prove the crime, not enough to prove the accused's guilt, no one else against the accused. In the absence of direct or strong circumstances, the prosecutor failed to prove his case against the accused. Beyond the shadow of a doubt, the defendant was convicted and the sentence was set aside because of an unjust decision by the trial court. The accused was acquitted and released, in circumstances such as r \ n \ r \ n
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2013
