Section 2 302 (b) Qutel filed an FIR with all the necessary details of the incident immediately following the conviction of appreciation of the evidence, the suspicion, and the possibility of any event by the prosecutor Was excluded by chance. In the same place, the police immediately inspected the police with the spot, so the privilege statement from the foot constable did not benefit the accused because of the overwhelming evidence of the prosecution available to the record complainant, and other witnesses being residents of the same village. Were natural. The ocular witnesses to the incident were in all material aspects of the case, the eye witnesses had no enmity with the accused and their close relationship with the victim was not sufficient to disprove their testimony. The account was substantially supported based on the well-received conviction received by the fatal bullet accused, the basic principles of evidence appreciation were maintained according to the FIR The same injury was reported, but the man suffered seven other two weapon injuries, as reported in a post-mortem report. No response was received, no crime was found on the spot, the investigating officer did not take any bullet in his possession and even the pistol was recovered, so the firearm expert was not sent for comment. The special motive alleged in R was not proved in court by what happened only between the accused and the victim. Until the incident, it was a mystery that the victim was on fire at the back, deserving of suspicion to the extent of his punishment, given the aforementioned circumstances.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2011
