There is no evidence against the accused persons of the section 249 proceedings, except that no overt act of presence on their site was assigned. The person's request was rejected. A, CCP, seeking their verdict, based on the fact that the case is on a solid stage and because the material witnesses' investigation is pending, the trial court failed to disclose the material witnesses, in which opinion The extent of this matter remains to be investigated. Co-accused were allowed to be discharged by prosecution The role of weapons retrieval and ineffective firing was specifically charged against co-accused persons but they were allowed to move freely with permission to withdraw the case. Were allowed but did not file an FIR. Speaking of the recovery of weapons from the custody of the accused and no indirect action has been charged, the art of prosecution can be easily drawn neither the witnesses' statement on the incident nor the presence of the accused at the scene. Neither explained nor did any of their actions be defined in the commission of the crime, the statement of the policeman, who appeared as a prosecution witness, was banned. Recovery of the vacancy on the site record did not clearly indicate whether the complainant's statement was not recorded or any evidence against the accused persons, other than their presence on the site, no specific action was taken by them in the commission of the crime. You were not assigned even the possibility of punishment for the accused
Related judgments — Quetta High Court Balochistan, 2012
