Clauses 2b2 (b), i) 7a (i), 7 33 Q f (v) / Q 34 The definition of Qatl-e-Ummad, Shuja and Hashima evidence was not available for any reason to conclude that all The accused have termed the joint intent. In addition to committing the murder of the victim and wanting a strong motive to justify such intent, there was another important fact that clearly defined the contribution of all the accused to the murder of the victim. As was disputed, both the prosecution's witnesses / eyewitnesses permanently exonerated the accused, who was armed with a gun, fired in the air and no one was hurt by the fire. The charge was against the other accused, who were armed with hatchets and addicts, and killed the prosecutor's witness, the three said. They took every opportunity to use their weapons with precaution that would certainly be avoided with the intention of killing or destroying the area. There is no common intention to commit fraud in the attackers. ? As a result, only one suspect can be held responsible for the person who opened fire with his gun. But that would not mean that the other three suspects did not share a joint intention with the co-accused, who were not only armed with deadly weapons. But those who actually used those people in the war with serious consequences, the common intention was not just to cause injuries, but beyond that, the accused was killed by firing directly with his gun. Was granted, under section 302 (b), PPC and life imprisonment
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2010
