Section 302 (b) of the Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Section 7 Qatiel Ahmed appreciated the evidence Eye = The witnesses testified directly to each other in trivial details, describing the incident directly. How was this style revealed? The medical evidence of the two victims was fully supported by the ocular witnesses. At the relevant time, the presence of witnesses was natural and there was no prejudice or wrongful desire against the accused. The immediate inquiry reports contained brief details. The case, which reconciled with the contents of the FIR, so mentioning the name of the complainant on the two notes of the investigating officer and the name of the accused on some of the notes did not affect the prosecution's case in any way, Reduction, negligence or lack thereof should not hinder the investigating officer from pursuing justice, and prosecutors should not suffer for the same report from the Franz Science Laboratory. Only a contentious clash of evidence, and any weakness in this regard, could not rob the intrinsic value of regularly verified ocular evidence through medical evidence; it was alleged by the prosecution that it had made strong and reliable. It was alleged by documentary evidence that two innocent people were killed in the incident. In his office, he deserved the convictions he had heard from the trial court appeals, he was dismissed under the circumstances.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2012
