Section 2 302 (b) Definition of Evidence Extra-judicial confession, excused statement of co-accused, retrial of prosecution on evidence of Danda's recovery based on accused and medical evidence was relevant again when extra-judicial confession of accused was of paramount importance. ? Both witnesses of the extra-judicial confession stated that the police did not record their statements during the investigation under Section 161; CCPC was unable to rely on the evidence of the witness whose statement was not recorded during the investigation. Otherwise, the extra-judicial confession was a felony, and it must be harmonized with other credible evidence. The statement of the co-accused was merely an excuse and could not be the basis for the accused's conviction. And it did not matter to its creator that under the law it is not permissible to treat a participant's statement as evidence against the other accused. Medical evidence itself is not an argument as to who is responsible for the injury. And it could not be used to the extent of confirming the Accular Account, or to confirm a more robust situation, the complainant's evidence was based on mere suspicion, though it was strong, to be used by anyone Could not replace the evidence. For example the accused had no blood stains from the recovery of the rod and was never sent to the Chemical Examiner because the same prosecution was accused of bleeding of any kind and There was no legal, convincing, or credible evidence available to link criminals with the crime against them.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2011
