Section 302 (b) / 148 Qatil Amad, complimenting the evidence, examined the complainant's chief even though it was in accordance with the FIR, but the entire investigation suggested that he was not present at the time of the incident. Not reporting the injuries, but the report was not taken on the spot, the prosecutor's witness, who was the brother of the two victims and claimed to be an eyewitness, was unable to rely on his statement, The witness denied that the version of the evidence that could be considered carefully in the Murzila reference, was that either the eyewitnesses were not present on the spot, or that the accused S and evidence has indicated the consultation, consideration or substances which could reflect, I can not believe it. There is no doubt that three people lost their lives and medical reports confirmed their brutal murder and other circumstances rather than unnatural death, blood stained clothes and the atmosphere of the earth, vacant by chance, But not all such evidence was sufficient to link the accused to the crime when molecular evidence was denied, even in such cases his conviction could not be ascertained. One of the accused Moto has been charged with the crime. Even if it was proved that the motions were not sufficient to say that the motions could be recorded as a repeat weapon, the evidence of the prosecution in both ways was not credible to the accused, did not prove his conviction. And the accused has been convicted. The trial court, set aside, was acquitted and released
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2012
