MANSOOR AHMAD ALIAS SHAHZAD ALIAS SHEERI versus STATE
Sections 302 (b), 460, 392 and 411 convictions, committing a domestic crime, robbery, receiving stolen property jointly identified the two accused were not included in the test. The precautionary measures taken by the investigating officers to conceal the identity of the accused were neither disclosed nor proved, despite the objections raised by the accused before the prosecuting magistrate's prosecution witnesses. Despite this the suspect was not identified. His role is clearly stated in the details played in the incident. No details of the accused were given in the FIR. Was done so that even the eyewitnesses could get a glimpse of it. At the trial, the witness who introduced the electric light said that the accused's dishonest correction was not credible. The missing articles recovered from the accused could not be identified. In the absence of their owners, the recovery of the pistol from the accused did not avail themselves of the legality of the crime, because of their false involvement. Failure to prove any prejudice or misconduct by, does not prove the truth of the prosecution's version The ski, because the prosecution was required to prove beyond a shadow of his case against the accused. The suspects were acquitted on the benefit of the doubt in the circumstances
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2012
