Section 302 (b) Qatil Ahmed's testimony of testimony has the benefit of doubt which the defendant's witness has won and whose statement has been withheld by the prosecutor, was neither a relative of the complaining party nor a resident of the area. , But his village was miles away from the complainant's residence why the prosecutor's case was silent on the matter, because the witness chose to go to the complainant's village, which was far away, the prosecutor's story was not known. ? The argument was medical evidence disputing the prosecution's evidence, which was not sent to the Chemical Examiner's office to clear the pistol of the account, and no prosecution witnesses and other prosecution witnesses were matched to match the pistol. Were. Not only was there a deep connection with the deceased, but because of the previous rivalry between the parties, he was inclined towards two of the three accused involved in the case. o They were acquitted by trial only through trial, the motion for unproven prosecution was filled with material contradictions / contradictions, especially when medical evidence contradicted the ocular account. Was seen and both the complainant and the prosecution witnesses were not present at the relevant time, the unlawful purpose, the unusual restoration of the pistol, the circumstances which led to the suspicion of the authenticity of the version of the prosecution, the prosecution on the capital charge. The defendant had failed to prove his guilt to prove his case. The accused is justified in convicting him on the basis of such inconsistent categorized / contradictory evidence, which would otherwise have been fraught with flaws, the benefit of every doubt.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2013
