Section 2 (2 ()) / / 34, 4A4 / & 34 & 7 337A (ii) Qatil-e-Amal, Qatiel Ahmed's attempt to compel and evaluate the evidence was incidental to the incident and at the scene of the incident. Witnesses were present. The story of the accused prosecution did not partly appeal to the intellect through the wounds he received, the prosecution did not tell the whole truth. There was no point in prosecuting the crime, for example, because the accused and the offender were sent to the forensic science laboratory on the same day and the firearms were used to dispose of the vacancies. That couldn't have been possible. The discriminatory value of the laboratory report was further destroyed, as no witnesses took steps to state that he had taken the weapons and the blanks to the laboratory's defense that Dee was merely injured by the neighbors and the witnesses Apart from being extremely apologetic, it was not confirmed, did not know how the firing started and what really happened before the incident, so there was a sudden fight and Section 34, PPC. Due to lack of joint intent, the accused was not hurt and the PPC was separated from the accused under section 230b (b) / the 34, medical evidence has given testimony from several witnesses. Had supported the injuries sustained by the people and the accused in connection with his convictions. And Sections 324 and 337A (ii), the conviction under PPC was upheld and accordingly the appeal was disposed of.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010
