The trial court distorted the facts of the case because of the section 497 (2) Contempt Rule (XLV of 1860), section 392/34 robbery guarantee, further investigation because the FIR stated that the complaint was in the house of the complainant's friend Was out While the trial court noted that the incident happened inside the complainant's home, the trial court said police had already collected enough material for the crime with the commission, but did not identify it. Was In addition to identifying the complainant by the police, enough material was collected which was not in accordance with the law, the prosecutor had no material available to link the accused to the commission of the crime. According to the law, such an identity cannot be relied on even if the only point available to the accused was illegally, sufficient to make him eligible for bail because the accused was convicted of the crime. Further investigation was required by law to attach, the accused was admitted in bail, under circumstances
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2010
