Section 302 (b) was filed two and a half hours after the report of the testimony of the evidence so that the delay in filing the report was the result of such delay, the prosecution had stated that any eyewitness The relationship did not belong to either party. Nor has there been any intimate relationship with any of them. They were examined at length, but nothing was brought on the record to show their interest in the deceased party or to give any purpose to falsely accusing the accused. Their testimony was a testimony to confidence. And no inherent error was found in it, saying the presence of witnesses cannot be suspected because at that time when they were in the lands around their village, the eye witness's account did not contradict the medical evidence here. Even if there was an eyewitness account. Unlike medical evidence, the trustworthy ocular account could not be neglected, in which case, having proved his case beyond a reasonable doubt, the defendant's guilt was proved by the testimony of two witnesses who had been neglected. Could not disperse statements. In cross-examination, the charges were, in the circumstances, properly attributed to the crime charged with the evidence, which was recorded according to the convictions sentenced because the family dispute was in the background of the incident. ? And the real cause of the crime has spread mysteriously. And it was not clear from the record of the case that there was no ground available to increase the punishment for the accused
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2009
