In Articles 2 (2 (b) and Q 34 of the trial), no direct evidence was available on the record for the benefit of the doubt as to the evidence of the joint intention, and the prosecution's case on the legal evidence was valid, having not seen the alleged incident. No motive was stated, and he claimed that the cause of the incident was not known, but in court he stated the motive, which could be considered afterwards / improvement, which was not only dismissed. But he had raised serious doubts about his credibility. The prosecution's witnesses did not assist the prosecution's other witness, his credibility There was strong suspicion of power and credibility, allegedly worn during the incident, were recovered, but nothing was available on the record to suggest that the blood was said to be dead on the clothes. Rehabilitation, prosecution did not benefit / confession Ion allegedly produced by the accused before the police, was not acceptable / acceptable under the law, the prosecution had failed to establish its case, and any allegation against the accused was The suspicion was not proved beyond doubt, but the trial was not justified in convicting the accused through an honorable decision which Was isolated. The accused were acquitted in these circumstances, extending the benefit of the doubt
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2015
