The testimony of the complainant was not acular, but the prosecution's witness stated that the prosecution's witness was listed with other witnesses only after the police received a report of another incident, which stated The two star witnesses were the father and son InterC and their evidence contained major and material contradictions indicating that they were either not present at the time of the alleged incident, or that it had not been claimed. It has been said that the witnesses did not encourage the trust and they proved to be untrustworthy. The prosecution witnesses, who were brothers, did not see the accused in the ward, and heard evidence that the medical evidence only confirmed the unnatural death of the deceased but the accused would not be linked to the alleged crime but theft. The recovery process took effect seven days later. The incident, and the evidence of both the recovery counselors was not contradictory. The alleged recovery in connection with the theft was made extremely suspicious, all witnesses dismissed saying that the theft was stained with blood, but They were not sent to the Franzic Science Laboratory for chemical testing. And no explanation was offered by the prosecution in this regard, the prosecution could not establish the motive for which the victim was allegedly killed, no one had seen the accused while he was injured. Yes, all the private witnesses and the police arrived at the ward. When the victim's injuries came and died, he was charged after his death with his village after he and his father were reported injured.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2013
