SHAFQAT HUSSAIN versus THE STATE THROUGH ADVOCATE-GENERAL AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR, MUZAFFARBAD
Section 302/324 / 337A (ii) / 337F (i) The evidence of the evidence of Qatil-i-Am, Shebla-Amjad and Baddiyah, was proof that the incident was a widespread incident and was an FIR. Immediately filed, the question of substitution of the accused did not arise. The question of identity was fully proved as the presence of witnesses on the spot was fully proved as the witnesses knew each other. The material points are consistent with his statements and his testimony as well. He could not be dismissed on the basis of mere relations, even though he was an independent witness and his presence was established at the time of the incident. The accused came to the scene with the firearms, which he showed Was that the incident was planned and not surprising and it was not a matter of sudden provocation The complainant's statement was in accordance with the facts stated in the FIR and there was no contradiction in his statement. The defendant involved in the FIR was made from an independent witness statement, denying the presence of all witnesses on the occasion. It could be, when three eye witnesses were injured and two of them were free, which had nothing to do with any of them. Witnesses' statements to the parties were beyond any doubt, accusing medical evidence, that it could not prove that it was an open fight and that the defendants had no premature involvement with the deadly weapon. One person died as a result. And three others were not injured in the attack, which indicated their general intention to attack the complaining party in a well-populated area.
Related judgments — Supreme Court Azad Kashmir, 2012
