Section 2 302 (b) definition of evidence of Qatil-Umid, the reduction of the circumstances of the conviction was contrary to the version of the accused which was presented by the prosecutor. Witnesses were not consistent in their statements. There was material contradiction between the statements of both witnesses. The medical evidence of his statements was fully supported by the FIR, the medical evidence recorded with the instant evidence proved the prosecution's case completely, in the circumstances, the trial of the accused beyond doubt. Was successful, although he was related to the deceased, but his evidence, which has been otherwise proven, cannot be excluded only on the basis of the relationship, allegedly in the hands of the complaining party. The injuries suffered by, were neither mentioned in the crime report nor the ocular account prosecutor. Witnesses had even removed a word. It is stated that the injured were not pressed by the prosecution. The question of prior hostility as the prosecution claimed that it was not proved on record by solid evidence and did not support the account and that the recovery of the carbine could not be interpreted as a piece of evidence. Do not help the prosecutor's story, even though the statement was true of the incident and the participation of the accused, but the manner and incident of the complainant did not mean that the incident was a sudden matter which occurred when both parties were involved in the incident. When the day came to the other, the matter of the accused was not dropped. Under section 2302 (b), PPC, sub
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2013
