Section 7 (e) Definition of Evidence of Conduct of Terrorism by Abduction for Abduction The suspect has the benefit of suspicion not to have been recovered from the accused at the time of the arson arrest, nor to any disclosure or indication of any official later. The witness did not testify. Neither the presence of a private witness at the time of the crime nor the reason for the prosecution's presence at the scene explained that the trial court did not consider material contradictions in the witness statements to make the recovery extremely suspicious. Was allegedly held from the accused. , The reason for believing his presence in the garden was there until the prosecution proves to the contrary. The sequence of events did not appeal to the mind that the accused could not be expected to release any of the abductors, who later reported to the police and arrested them. According to the prosecutor's story, the accused could not be believed that he tried to escape from the car when he could. The co-accused did so, so that the kidnapper failed to identify the accused while escaping. The other was not presented to the court without giving any reason, the investigating officer failed to investigate the case properly and no independent witness could be shared from the eligible area without any doubt to prove the alleged offense. I was used to His appeal was accepted, keeping the conviction and sentence aside
Related judgments — Quetta High Court Balochistan, 2011
