Section 2 302 (b) Qatil Ahmed praising the evidence was not properly appreciated on the basis of the allegations of litigation in the trial case, only the complainant was the accused, He clearly stated that the rest of the accused were present in the court, no reliance on such evidence of the complainant, which was an interested witness, the prosecution witnesses did not provide a proper explanation that he was discharged. For what purpose did he go to the railway station and why he did not explain this fact. The complainant immediately said that they had seen the victim in the company of the accused on the missing railway station motive, the entire incident involving the hand of the daughter of a person was not established, but the person's prosecution was not examined. That was when the prosecution case. It was that the accused was angry with the victim, then it was unbelievable that the victim went to an absolute spot with the accused when the basic premise of the prosecution's case fell, so that the accused could prove the allegation before the investigating officer. Yes, and such evidence was brought to the record by the trial court and is believed. While under law the law was unacceptable to the police officer during the interrogation under evidence under Articles 38 and 39 of the law, Sha'Allah, 1984, no articles were recovered from the suspect's possession after his arrest. The prosecution's witnesses have confessed that they were related. Complainant, Their Evidence Needed to Combine Some Independent Pieces of Evidence Prosecution Case
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2013
