Sections 302 (a) / 34 of the Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Section 6 (1) (c), 6 (2) (a) and 7 (a) of the West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), Section 13 (d) Definition of evidence from murder, terrorism, and possession of weapons The benefit of the doubt was recorded after more than 10 days after the accused's confessional statements were recorded and the prosecutor failed to state that the same confession was unusual in recording statements. No delays have been confirmed. The confessional statements of the accused were recorded 8 days after the Independent Proof Identification Parade, which showed that it was not voluntary and true, and also raised suspicion in the litigation case that witnesses at the time of the identity parade had not arrested any of the accused. No role was assigned to Suspicion of the prosecution's case was raised as it was alleged to be in the presence of two persons, but the prosecution failed to examine the two accused. There were two witnesses and no one from the eligible area was examined, while they were available. The complainant did not name the two witnesses of the prosecution in their statement under Section 154, CR PC. The evidence of the above witnesses cannot be ignored, the evidence on record did not meet the accepted requirements of the Secured Administration of Criminal Justice; in the cases, the suspects were entitled to take advantage of the doubt, under the court. The verdict was kept separately, the accused were acquitted of the charges and were released under the circumstances.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2011
