The testimony of the prosecution witness, who, according to his evidence, had seen the accused for a moment, four and a half years ago, claimed that he had identified the accused for four and a half years. Of the latter, it cannot be relied upon that no unforeseen circumstances are available for the witness to believe, that their evidence should be ignored. The date of the incident was doubtful. Other evidence in the record for failure to disclose, the accused's blood-stained clothing was recovered. The Teaching Officer did not even list the landlord / flat owner's statement to acknowledge the suspect as a tenant proof of the defendant's recovery, which also conflicted that all of his costs after the alleged recovery were made. When the investigating officer failed to carry out his duty honestly and properly, the interrogating officer failed to investigate / investigate the main character of the prosecutor's story, who had lost his flat prosecution. Referred to the complainant to seek the services of, in any circumstances suspected of any reasonable suspicion of murder of the deceased Failed to present a case. The accused were set aside, acquitted and released on suspicion.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2013
