CRPC of the Complainant and Prosecutor's witnesses disclosed that under Section 498 Determination Code (XLV of 1860), Section 302/34 Conviction AMD pre-arrest bail, further inquiry FIR under Section 161 and approval of statements. The names of the suspects are not mentioned, nor was the role assigned to them. And they were not charged. The witnesses of the incident were not mentioned, and no details of the accused were released in the FIR. Subsequently, under Section 161, CCP of the statements, there were complaint witnesses as well as prosecution witnesses in which the accused were named for the first time. , Which contradicted earlier statements, requested a delay of four days for recording subsequent statements under Section 161, CRPC, after filing an FIR, recording additional statements from informants giving different versions. The delay had created suspicion. An important factor that was likely to give rise to the fact that the second version contained in the supplementary statement was submitted after consideration and consultation by the prosecutor. And this will also have a serious impact on the prosecution's case. Nothing was on record to show that any weapon or motorcycle allegedly used in the crime was recovered from the accused, accused of recovering different types from the location of the alleged incident, support the prosecution's case. Because only one person reportedly opened fire on the two victims. According to the FIR, the complainant had expressed his suspicion of unknown persons, which had not been investigated by the police, otherwise the alibi taken by the accused would be. Record the evidence of the parties
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2011
