Sections 302, 109 and 148/149 of the Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3), by the combination of witnesses regarding the double murder of evidence of Qatil Ahmed reference, the scope trial court awarded the two accused to Section 302 (b) PPC. Was sentenced and sentenced to death. On two counts, the accused submitted that the witnesses were related to the deceased and they were witnesses on the spot. The relationship between the witnesses and the deceased was not sufficient to refute my argument that it was the duty and responsibility of the court to compel interested witnesses, before it could be affirmed. Whether such a witness saw the incident and was in a position to identify the accused and whether he should be believed without further discussion. The prosecution's witnesses have long faced interim trials, but their truth cannot be shaken by a defense lawyer. Both courts came to the conclusion that their statements were of the kind of testimony that their testimony was given due weight and they were convinced that if the court was satisfied with the truth of the direct evidence, then the need for evidence was of greater importance. Legislation was not a rule of law, but has it been alleged that it failed to justify the intervention of the Supreme Court by exercising constitutional jurisdiction? Failing to raise any question about the law of public importance was arbitrary in the constitutional jurisdiction and the Supreme Court, in favor of the circumstances in which two people were brutally murdered, in their favor. Refused to work, two courts were upheld under which the Supreme
