Sections 302 (b), 337a (ii), 337l (2) and 504/34 Qatil Amad, which caused damage to Shuja al-Khalifa, were intentionally insulted with the intention of violating the peace. Granted, the evidence of the definition of common intention was not sufficient to conclude that the evidence available on the record was sufficient to conclude that the accused could be prosecuted if he was found guilty. The trial court had seriously erred in finding that the prosecution had succeeded in making the charge against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The trial court's finding was not based on any valid evidence, so the court had to determine both contradictory evidence to conclude that one of them should be chosen for dependency because the incident was a densely populated area. I had a one-day incident, but no respected locals had come forward to witness the incident in which prosecutors' witnesses admitted to trusting an incident that did not affect their trust, The trial court cannot be relied on without independent co-operation, except for the appearance of a minimal application of the mind of the court. Er, legal weakness, laconas, eccentricity and arbitrary judgment, judgment was rendered to the irrational and interested witnesses presented by the prosecution. In the case, two of them were denied by the trial court, and the prosecutor failed to obtain any independent cooperation, so the prosecutor could reasonably doubt his case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Failed to prove. Set aside the conviction of the accused recorded by the trial court
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2013
