Sections 302 (b), 392, 411, 460 and 34 of the Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Section 7 murder convictions, robbery, receiving stolen property fraudulently, domestic torture overnight, evidence from a joint intention A 20-hour delay in appreciating the filing of the FIR was worrying, with the complaint that both witnesses of the prosecution were residents of remote locations of the incident, between the injured and post-mortem inspection likely between 18 and 36 hours. Was, in view of the facts and circumstances of the case. , It cannot be denied that the incident happened by someone who was welcomed into the home, who was wasted time. And as a result, for some reason or other, the statements of the witnesses of the complainant and other prosecutors came to light, it seemed that by retrieving some articles from the accused, it was also suspected that the motive for the matter was far away. Was distant and the prosecution was unsuccessful. Prove this point, either during the investigation or at the trial, it cannot be ruled out that the prosecution's confession was obtained by the third degree, and there is no legal value to such confession. Especially when the same issue was overturned. The witness last seen received a location 30 km away from the incident, and could not explain the motive for which he visited the scene. The full prosecution case was based on circumstantial evidence, and He should also be punished for present-day evidence. Reliable and cogent corroborative evidence available on the interconnected record, which seems to have been completely missing in this case
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2015
