Section 4/4/33/2148/4040 / / ?88 / ?99 To prevent a public servant from performing his duties of murder, maneuvering or assault or criminal force, aggravated armed with deadly weapon, illegal The assembly evidence was alleged to have taken advantage of the suspicion that the police had fired at the police party, which allegedly arrested the suspects, recovered their weapons and found stones and bricks. There were. It was lying on the road, according to which the police were there with the intention of committing a Duty Trial Court and convicted and convicted the accused that the alleged cross-fire occurred during the crossfire. Was not made and during the evidence he was not given an article number, which shows that the mere formality has been fulfilled and speculatively to indicate the fact that neither the property was actually prepared and Nor was the article number station diary displayed in which the investigating officer's departure and site visit There was an admission that was not presented during the trial that 11 of the 13 accused were. The police vehicle was identified in the light of the crossfire, it was unbelievable that no one was hurt on either side that the cross-fire continued for 20-25 minutes, the contents of the FIR and prosecution. There was a contradiction between the evidence of the witnesses (police officers) regarding the location of the incident. The prosecution did not secure the stones and bricks that were allegedly placed on the road by the trial court.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2013
