Sections 302 (b) and 202 of the Counter-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Sections 7 of the Martyrdom (Articles 10 of 1984), Articles 38 and 39 of Delinquent Information, deliberately to inform the crime by the person bound to give information The mistrial, the testimony of the suspect, the benefit of the doubt two policemen, who appeared as prosecutor's witnesses, told of the two disclosures of the accused person. One is about the murder of the accused in front of him and the other is that the complainant's guest house has been exposed in connection with concealing the crime / knife crime weapon in connection with the murder of the accused by the accused. The confession was a crime, inadvertent in view of this costume in the arts, 38 and 39 Constitutional evidence, 1984; the second disclosure, which involved concealing a knife, was admissible because the alleged weapon was recovered in pursuit of it. The evidence of the evidence itself is purely ro diversity, in the absence of any direct or concrete evidence, to bring home a charge against them. During the cross-examination, the witness confessed that the knife was not stained with blood, the Chemical Examiner's report was not presented with evidence to prove that the knife was stained with blood. Given that no direct evidence is available, the sentence cannot be based on anyone else. The type of evidence, whenever convincing, was presented by ocular evidence by the complainant and another prosecutor who stated that he had included the accused in the commission of the crime because he was the accused in the Baloch Hall Ohwal. The person could not receive the death penalty. For the sake of doubt and simplicity and suspicion, the evidence was awarded to the Baluchi Hall and Ahwal.
Related judgments — Quetta High Court Balochistan, 2011
