The accused was not named in the FIR on Section 5A5A Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Section 7 (e) for abduction of assets and kidnapping for ransom and his accomplices were arrested by a different accused. Had presented in the matter. The accused was a different person than the accused involved in the case, the prosecution failed to prove that he was an accused in the present case, the accused was a felony accused in his examination under section 342, the CCP had legal The effect, which in the absence of an independent confrontation cannot even be the definitive evidence of his alleged crime, is clear from the prosecution's testimony regarding the independent name, parents, caste and resident as well as his separate identity. Despite inquiries under Section 2342, the CCP was unforgiving and deadly for legal action. Zam was named with the different parents, myself and housing in this case. The important statement, which is described under Section 161, shall not be construed as equivalent to the FIR nor read by an Assistant Director of the ACE as part of the same lodging of the FIR. Followed by a 24-hour delay from the police station to its own A. This time, I uncovered the most suspicious evidence of the allegedly ransom money and demand for more ransom money in the case, after the prosecution withheld the best evidence in this regard. It was not confirmed, which exposed its incompetence and instability. The statement of motives was self-reported, the informant was not a registered informant of the local police but the complainant knew
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010
