In section 302 (b), Qatil's appreciation of the evidence, the confession scope trial court had dropped the clear value of the defendant's confessional statement on the ground that the magistrate did not disclose that he had confessed to the accused in his own language. Explained the crime. The prosecution had a deadly five days to record a confessional statement in the case, the confession by the accused on the oath was not a confession, the complainant was not a witness to the incident, but his brother disclosed the incident. Yes, both witnesses contradicted each other, their evidence was not credible and they suspected the presence of four eyewitnesses on the incident. The skeptical medical officer made a contradictory statement in his examination of the chief and cross examination and in cross examination, completely opposed his examination of the chief. He did not produce the original post-mortem report and admitted that he had made a false statement. The medical officer's evidence was of no value because the prosecution's case was without medical evidence, both evidence and medical. The evidence was not credible Violation of the prosecution's provisions Section 103, CRPC, as a resident of the area, was not asked to act as a location adviser, recovery of crime prevention And the accused was misled into accepting the trial court's direct evidence, medical and circumstantial evidence and proceeded completely. A. The principle of scrutiny of the evidence was wrong, the culprits were punished for not being based on the concrete principles of the criminal administration of justice; they were not sustainable;
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2015
