Appreciating the evidence of Section 9 (c), the prosecutor's argument that the accused had not been charged with the recovery of the alleged sanctions was denied by the statement of the inspector and other prosecution witnesses, who accompanied the investigating officer to ANF staff. Were officers. At the time the complainant, since they had fully supported each other on the material details of the prosecution's case, the witnesses gave straightforward and convincing evidence and defense in their statement while undergoing a lengthy cross-examination. Despite failing to damage his reputation, the accused were arrested somehow. Along with the opportunity, the F-section L report was also positive in this regard, there was no material contradiction in the statements of the prosecution witnesses, and the accused made false allegations or misconduct of ANF officials on their false allegations. Was not charged. The trial court held that the trial court was guilty of involvement in the trial of the accused, not open to any exception, nor can it be planned in great quantities by the prosecution against the accused, nor for the prosecution's witnesses. Material contradictions or contradictions were brought on record to defame credibility and the accused did not accuse ANF officials of any ill will or misconduct. Because of their false involvement in the trial court's allegations, these reasonable searches of the trial court were not open to any exception, nor could such a large amount of sanctions be imposed by the prosecution against the accused. Nor can contradiction or contradiction of material contention be brought to the record. Proof of Proof of Evidence
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2009
