Section 2302 (b) / Q 34 Complaint filed the FIR praising the evidence that the police was located at the appropriate time and that the police officer started investigating after recording the complainant's statement, the prosecution threw Only four people were involved in the murder of purely broad and four persons, so the possibility of debate and consultation arose, therefore, the prosecution's version could not be ruled out simply because the complaint was filed at this place. Was recorded whose main features stand out. His failure to present a parallel version in his defense reinforced the prosecution's story, and despite the contradictory statements of two eyewitnesses during the investigation and trial, another eyewitness who was a natural witness to the incident. Was left Being persevering with or without the pressures set against the accused political influence did not ruin the evidence of the said witness, which was regularly verified by medical evidence and other attendance-related circumstances. That is, based on the eyewitness statement alone, the perpetrator of the accused can be retained, provided the credibility of the witness was of importance and neither the police's opinion about the accused's innocence nor the number of witnesses was acceptable. Nor is the court bound. They did not benefit from the recovery of the crime weapon from the accused when the prosecution's case against them proved. There was no mitigating circumstance available in favor of the convictions by ocular evidence and the accused was sentenced to death, which was confirmed in the circumstances.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010
