The testimony of Section 302 (b) Qatil-e-Amad evidence was not cited by the prosecution, no independent witness was cited by the prosecutor, yet shops and hotels and residential premises were located near the scene. They are at odds between the opportunity and the relevant witnesses. The complaining party has been admitted by the complainant and the witnesses found contradictions and material contradictions in the testimony of the witnesses. However, in the present case it was lacking. The prosecutor was obliged to prove his case beyond reasonable doubt and the defense was not liable to prove his innocence, recording the statements of the prosecution witnesses under section 161, CRPC, after a delay of 12 days. Was gone and failed to explain the delay because the prosecution did not record. The statement of witnesses within time, the molecular evidence was earlier due to doubts where there was only one situation in which doubts were being raised in an intelligent mind then the benefit of doubt was not given to the accused, But there was no credibility as to the exact circumstances. There was a contradiction between the medical evidence and the ocular evidence. Evidence was concerned, the adversary and the unlawful prosecutor failed to establish a crime against the accused; the suspect was acquitted of the charge and ordered to be released, without any doubt.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2010
