Section 242424 / Q 34 Attempts to commit murder The testimony of both witnesses in connection with the definition of evidence and the number of injured persons sitting and injured, supported the testimony of the injured prosecutor, including the number of bullets and In terms of the number of fires, it is also believed that the injured body was injured. It was neither proven nor defended, nor was the doctor questioned about the delay in making the 30-minute report, which was fully explained, which was immediately understood, was the basis for consultation or False occasions, this was not completely ruled out. The defendants pleaded that because the prosecution's testimony was unethical and immoral, it could not be safely relied on for the most part. In view of the settled law of the law, even if a witness was corroborated by other evidence, the interested witness could be trusted. It was not enough for the court to exclude other evidence. There was no need to ascertain whether the witness saw the incident or not, and he was in a position to give evidence as to whether it should be treated as a union or not, and the evidence of any interested witness could not be denied, Unless an ill will is brought on record with the accused when the relevant witness can be found authentic. In view of the other circumstances of the case, the immovable or interested witness could not be prevented from being discharged because the court had to see whether the said testimony was in accordance with the material evidence which was an impressive charge of trust. Failed
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2010
