Sections 302 (b), 201, 377 and 34 of the Crimes of Adultery (Enforcement Hood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), Section 12 murder, for the disappearance of evidence of the crime, adultery, joint intention to define evidence The benefit of the witness, who had presented the evidence for the last time, was to see the deceased in the company of the accused six days later and after recording the FIR, the fact that Syed's witness had a suspicious past and that too While in police service where he was dismissed, the service at the time of the offer was in the employment of witnesses, the victim's complainant and his mother-in-law, the evidence of which was neither credible nor reliable. He was free from any doubt, but was persuaded to fill the gap but could not prosecute. Be able to prove the fact that the victim was eventually seen by the prosecution witness, the prosecution's witness before the accused allegedly made extra judicial confession about his involvement in the crime, the deceased's in-laws' Nevertheless, he did not make the alleged extra-judicial confession to the police or the complainant overnight, but complained to the complainant before the trial the next day. Talking about the confessional statement, the person in whose presence the accused did not present the extra-judicial confession offense was said that all the facts made the extra-judicial confession highly unlikely and it is suspected that the accused was punished. Additional judicial confessions cannot be relied upon to maintain. The recovery memo regarding the allegedly recovered articles was confirmed by a person who was not presented, but for no apparent reason
