Section 2 (2 (b) Qatil Amad affirmed the complainant's statement of appreciation of the evidence, the prosecution's witness also confirmed, which was in the venue at the time of the incident. Medical evidence also supported the version of the prosecution). , The defense performed a long cross-examination, but no prosecution witness statement was found to be contrary and contradictory; there were no reasons, in the circumstances, from the ocular account presented by the complainant and the prosecutor's witness. To refute, the certified and blood-stained cotton recovery certified by medical evidence and its positive report, Franz The Science Laboratory fully supported the complainant's statement that the FIR vehicle was not delayed in the absence of the witnesses' identification, saying that the vehicle's recovery was unusual and would neither assist the prosecution nor The trial court correctly presented these findings in the circumstances that the evidence of the defense prosecution was consistent, consistent and serious ariel points for each other on each meter, such as timing, commissioning of the crime, identification of the accused with specific weapons. Which were not open to any exceptions, weapons of crime could not be recovered. Oh. A situation was encountered to thwart the prosecution case; a witness, who could not be traced, was presented to the prosecutor two witnesses and was satisfied with the number of witnesses, which the prosecution deemed necessary to keep any witnesses. Had the ability to present it. Prove the case The testimony of the two witnesses of the prosecution was substantiated, and after the trial court correctly believed the witnesses, the defendant testified.
Related judgments — Quetta High Court Balochistan, 2012
