Section 2 302 (b) Definition of Evidence The benefit of the doubt was opposed by the post-mortem report at the time of death, which was detrimental to the prosecution's case and even to doubt about the mechanism of the incident. He also suspected the presence of eyewitnesses by eyewitnesses. Both the prosecution's witnesses were not harmed, it can be assumed that they were not present at the time the incident took place, and the trial court erred in admitting evidence against the convicted suspect, who was acquitted. The co-accused was not convicted. The strange case of this case was that the present case was filled with suspicion, while only one suspicion was sufficient to discredit the entire evidence and the accused was not required to have many doubts even one. Even in the case, reasonable suspicion should be raised about the crime of the accused. Make him deserving of evil and it was his right. The presence of witnesses did not prove beyond any doubt. Easily known, the benefit of the doubt should go to the beneficiary who was charged, who deserved the victory, was acquitted of the charges leveled against him and was released.
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2010
