Section 302 (b) appreciation of the value of the evidence was doubtful at the end of the month of November at 45 o'clock in the morning at 45 minutes, there was a possibility that there was not enough light available at that time. ? And the medical evidence in relation to the injury to the victim's body, and the witnesses tried to change their version to bring the incident to the medical evidence, such a change in the witness statements clearly indicated They indicated that they had made improvements to the FIR statements, not to mention the nature of the weapons. It was only stated that the accused was armed with firearms, while during the court proceedings he stated that the accused was equipped with a pistol at the relevant time. The circumstances indicated that the witnesses did not know the incident. Until the crime was proven. In the possession of the Investigating Officer, the firehouse was dispatched to a specialist 24 days after being detained; the pistol was recovered three days after the arrest and after a year and a half of its recovery, it was opened by a firearm specialist. Was sent to The detainee was told that the pistol remained after his recovery and that until it was sent to the firearm specialist, such a broken chain regarding the detention of the weapon of the crime was the whole process of recovery. Had made a very suspicious recovery and positive report of the firearm. In such cases the expert could not be trusted, the witnesses did not see the incident and the prosecutor was not telling the true facts.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010
