Section 2302/34 The delay of four hours and 55 minutes in filing the definition of evidence was not fatal in itself. If it was not inappropriate and well described, then the delay in filing the FIR was satisfactorily stated, which, under the circumstances, was not known in the prosecution case, both the complainant and the other witness There were no witnesses to the occasion, because the opportunity witness was who usually should not be present. He could not reasonably explain his presence at a particular place, at a certain time, or at the usual place of life, while witnesses stated that the complainant and other eye witnesses were present on both occasions. All the reasons are stated. The deceased had close relatives, but during interrogation, no personal enmity of the witnesses against the accused could be brought to the record, even though no suggestion was made in this regard, both said eyewitnesses were not interesting witnesses. Because they have no personal problems. No contradictions were found with previous statements of prosecution witnesses against the accused Medical evidence was not in contradictory dispute The statements of witnesses were also strongly corroborated in the report of the Franz Science Laboratory, medical evidence, recovered on occasion. The report, from the Forensic Science Laboratory, and the recent incident of the suspects also confirmed the effectiveness of the eyewitness account. The suspect was charged, which cannot be explained precisely, but lack of motivation or absence of it, the prosecutor's case was not considered to be known, according to defense witnesses close to the accused.
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2009
