The benefit of the doubt as defined in Articles 302 (b) and 34 of the conviction, the joint intention evidence, occurred at about 11 o'clock in the morning at about 30 o'clock, and no light source was mentioned in the FIR, nor any of the statements. The source presented to the court. The prosecution's witnesses remained cloudy and dark overnight, even when the murders were dark / dark, the identity of a person remained a serious question, during the prosecution, the prosecution's witnesses tried to adjust these cases. ? Statements with medical evidence, but could not succeed Lady Doctor said seven injuries to the victim's body, while ocular testimony proved that prosecutors' witnesses did not accurately describe the injured. ? It was proven that, the hostility from the prosecution case and their interest towards the accused persons, the relationship of the prosecution witnesses was made clear by the record of the affidavit of the prosecution witnesses (her relatives), the medical and the ocular. The non-discriminatory inequality between the accounts had a questionable benefit to the prosecutor's case. The statement did not prove from the medical evidence that a report by the Franz Science Laboratory regarding the allegedly recovered pistols was in favor of the accused. The solution had to be, although it was positive, but it did not result, why The investigating officer involved was not empty any crime scene. The accused did not cause any harm to the victim, and he was involved in the prosecution case improvement and was suspicious and failed to prove any reasonable suspicion against the accused. Was, to
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2015
