THE STATE THROUGH ADVOCATE-GENERAL KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA versus MUHAMMAD RAMZAN
Section 324/353/429/148/149 West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), Section 13 Explosives Act (VI of 1908), Section 3/4 Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Section 7 Criminal Code Code of Conduct (V9 1898), Section 417 (2A), public employment, mischief, mischief, common commodity, the purpose of detonating or possessing or possessing explosives, terrorist and unlawful assembly to prevent confusion, attack or criminal force. Attempt to commit was an ineffective attempt by Qatal Ahmed, firing on the police party against the respondents / suspects against the bad indictment of the allegations of evidence, and the raiding party had their official duties. To stop them from performing. And the formation of an illegal assembly for the purpose of rebellion, no direct evidence was available in this case and the testimony of the four witnesses was not supported by the facts of the shooting by the accused in the police party, as well as these statements were recovered. Done. The contradictions in the statements of the prosecution witnesses were largely desirable, as long as the prosecution's case was related to the material conflicts and millions of evidence in the prosecution's evidence, the reason for the matter was that the matter came to the ground. Could not identify any weakness. , The illegal or jurisdictional error in the court's unclean searches so that the High Court could not prove its case against the accused without any reasonable doubt, the trial court correctly held during the trial. It was diagnosed. The strangest consequence is that when a criminal is acquitted after being subjected to torture and order by a competent court, after a lengthy trial, then he becomes a possibility of dual innocence.
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2012
