Section 2 (2 (b) and Q 34 Qatal) FIR was registered in a case against two unidentified persons with a joint intention and the accused was later sentenced by a supplementary statement based on the information provided by the two prosecution witnesses. There was no eyewitness record on the murder of the accused accused of shooting the deceased on the co-accused \ Lalkar deceased, the prosecutor's witness was the complainant's son and the victim's real brother is the deceased's real father and two The statement of the prosecutor's testimony regarding the death of the deceased in the presence of the brothers cannot be relied upon without assistance. The only witness was a witness of the occasion, who was not able to avoid any doubt in his presence at the time of the incident; the supplementary statement given by the complainant was not only the result of that, but the millions No credibility can be attached to the additional statement of an attempt to do so, and it would not be safe to prosecute the accused, announcing the alleged death of the victim before the prosecution witness, by any legal force Was not empty, because the statement of testimony before the investigating officer was and is only under Section 161, Cr PC. The deceased participant's death statement had already been lost on the benefit of the suspect, the identity parade of the accused was unnecessary because not only did the complainant specifically designate the accused in his supplementary statement, but also the witness who had identified Was identified during the incident. The parade had already shown them the recovery of the pistol from the suspect, which was also important because there was no recovered from the place and allegedly by the accused.
