Section 2 302 (b) Qatil Ahmed did not commend the allegations nor was specifically designated by the complainant in the FIR, nor did the investigating officer, in his statement recorded at the trial, The identity of the suspect was not paraded after the suspect was arrested, who was told that the suspect was the real brother of a co-accused, whom the complainant identified at the time of the incident, it was impossible, in the circumstances, that the complainant was the accused Could not identify the suspect, who was shown as an unknown suspect in the FIR, but did not mention the person who was involved in the incident. Qutt was with the complainant, and had witnessed the entire incident, not being presented as a witness during the trial, who exchanged the victim's body at the scene of the crime as well. The witness was not presented, the testimony of the two witnesses, who were witnesses to the incident Ed; was aware of the fact that the motorcycle in the prosecutor's story caused serious disturbance when using a motorcycle in the presence of any of the accused. Was not made, but only two of the three accused mentioned in the FIR were charged with armed with Kalashnikov. Yes. In the FIR or in the statement of the prosecution witnesses it is determined that the accused was armed with a pistol / revolver at the time of the incident. The version of the two version which the accused agreed was to be accepted when the accused was not present at the time of the incident was established beyond reasonable doubt by the prosecution, in these circumstances, their common intentions. The deceased was accompanied by his co-accused in the offer
