Sections 395, 397 and 34 of the robbers and robbery definition of evidence was evidence of the prosecution's testimony was inconsistent as it excluded it in the last line of its investigation that the accused were involved in the evidence at the time of the incident. The prosecution's other witness was also irrational because he had dismissed the Chief of In-Chief in the examination that he and other employees of the bank were in fear or pressure, so he could not see the perpetrators of the robbery in the bank. , There was also evidence of other witnesses. Uncontested since neither he was robbed nor hurt, the evidence of other witnesses is contradictory as there are many contradictions in his evidence in the presence of policemen, the effect of recovering the currency notes from the accused. The wind, and even the amount was not disclosed, the witnesses stated in the evidence that the money was not with the recipient as there was no refund and no order was issued by the trial court under section 577, About three days after the date of the letter to the Judicial Magistrate injured security guard, the CCPC ID parade Naqad was, who was the star witness, the prosecution was not able to check in, private person who was not accused had returned, this testing. Evidence of witnesses found the prosecution and even several contradictions, the injured person was not inspected, the identity parade without the role of the accused in the identification parade under Section 397, PPC, and without fulfilling the terms of Article 22 Running late did not prove. () The testimony of the law, 1984 1984 law law had no importance in the eyes of the law, in the circumstances,
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2010
