Sections 392, 395, 412 and 34 of robbery, robbery, dishonesty and receiving stolen property in a joint intention commission consistency in evidence of the testimony of the complainant and the prosecution of the testimony of the witnesses, at the time of the incident at the witnesses' place. The witnesses indicated that the witnesses made their statements in clear words, detailing the presence of eyewitnesses as witnesses and as witnesses in the identification parade by the suspects in several investigations of the witnesses. There was no suggestion that they were not available at the time of the incident or that they were Purchasing to testify Not to mention the witnesses' names in the FIR will not affect the credibility of the witnesses because in the event of a hate crime, the complainant may omit the name of any witness, especially where There was a great gathering on the occasion, either before or after the crime, that both prosecution witnesses were subjected to a lengthy cross-examination, but they persisted on all the material details of the prosecution case. The incident was a daylight and the accused stayed with the witnesses for forty minutes to complete their mission. And the witnesses had close proximity to remember them so that they could be identified later so that the statement of the witnesses was influenced by the trust in the accused's identity in the court, and the witnesses agreed on all material points to suggest it. Nothing was available that testified falsely. The accused was allegedly identified by the accused, who led a police party and looted from their homes, to recover the stolen gold.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2013
