Section 302/148/149 Criminal Code of Conduct (v. 1898), Section 417 Qatil AMD appealed against being injured at the point shown in the site plan, while the complainant and two prosecution witnesses stood. Claimed to have seen this incident. At point B, more than 770 feet away and no sound was heard that the complainant and the prosecutor's witnesses could describe the arms and seats of the injured. The matter was a cross-fire between the complaining party and the accused, which used different weapons freely. The fact that the police had collected a large number of vacancies spread over a large area by the parties indicated that the FIR was mentioned in the complainant while filing the FIR. It is alleged that the shooting resulted in the death of the deceased. The deceased was fired by none of the twenty-eight accused due to any injury to the deceased person. His face was considered for the alleged injury of an accused by the supplementary statement, as no additional statement was attached to the FIRI witness's account and priority of medical evidence, in that Was variable and did not harmonize with everyone. The second report of the Franzic Science Laboratory was of no help to the prosecution because the prosecution was negative. The advocate for the appellant was unable to identify any weakness, legal or factual error in the appellant's decision and failed even on a particular finding. Or misreading of evidence by the trial court;
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2011
