The testimony of Section 302 (a) Qatil-e-Amad was one of the star witnesses who took advantage of the suspect, whose name was not found in the FIR, who clearly stated that he was present on it. was not. The other star of the spot at the time of the incident was a friend of the witness's brother, his name was not mentioned in the FIR, it was said that he was present at the time of the incident, but left him because of prosecution. Given that the cause of the incident was not proven to be a winning charge / when he injured himself and filed an FIR, he did not name the two star witnesses, such prosecution by the prosecution. Was fatal and obstructed prosecution. Neither case is permissible nor is it sufficient for the accused to prove himself guilty as the two star witnesses did not trust the ocular account through the testimony and if the same was read the essence of the medical evidence. I, the situation raised serious doubt in the case of the prosecution, the benefit of such doubt should go to the accused, as he deserves the benefit of the doubt, not as a grace and privilege when a cause arises. In the sensible mind, it would be enough to simply dismiss the prosecution's evidence. The present case was that there was no evidence in the way it was disclosed in the FIR, nor had the incident been disclosed. The trial court failed to properly interpret the short evidence available in the record. , Because the conviction could not be based on such weak evidence that the defendant's conviction and sentence were set aside and that he was charged with his own charges.
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2012
