Section 2 (b (b)), the inquiry into the evidence, questions about the amount of determination was made in broad daylight and it was the shop of the deceased party; no background of any previous animosity or hatred between the two parties. The witnesses of the incident were the real brothers of the accused and had no reason or intention to falsely interrogate the accused involved in the murder, they were like, independent witnesses of the incident record. It turned out that the incident was one of the two affiliated shops of the deceased party and that both witnesses worked at the shops mentioned at the time of the incident. Jay was when the witnesses were not only free but also natural witnesses of the crime and reliance on their testimony is no exception, in the circumstances, the trial court could be taken to ascertain the crime registered against the offender, 3/4 hours before the actual incident, the murder between the victim and the perpetrator was a minor obstacle, and if so, if the offender returned to the place after the said period, only the deceased had died. You are well aware that the deceased parties were four young brothers and were available at the said location and that the knife alone could not fulfill this purpose and the actual The criminals were put himself hard. Apparently it was during the above-mentioned encounter at the shop of the accused party that the culprit took a knife from there and struck the victim alone, with eyewitnesses describing him as a vegetable shop and Poultry was run. One such event was the meat shop at the scene of the event where tools such as knives were readily available.
