Sections 307, 147, 148 and 149 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Islamic Laws (Enforcement) Act (IX of 1974), Sections 7, 15 and 24 of Qutel-e-Adh which have no definition of torture, uproar, common object evidence. In this case, it did not prove, but the phenomenon of the deployment and cross-examination of witnesses showed that the enmity between the parties was prevalent, all the witnesses were from interstate and even with the accused, there was no Strong confrontation by independent resources. The ocular version was needed, in which case the dead ocular version does not have any bullet. And this part of the story does not appear from reports of exaggeration that the wound on the victim's body resulted from two bullets, which led prosecutors to claim that both fires were on the same part of the deceased's body. And caused injuries. The crime was a very suspicious weapon, at the request of two witnesses, 12 bore guns, which were very close to the victim, were told that the witnesses were unconcerned with the accused, but that the investigating officer had committed the rivalry by the investigating officer. Ignored. The weapon was not transparent, and the prosecution witnesses who were interested and hated, were not found to be fair even during the purification process, believing their group to record the accused's conviction without any independent source. Not safe The site's plan also negated the prosecution's story, in which case, was not justified The accused was acquitted of the allegations leveled against him.
Related judgments — Shariat Court Azad Kashmir, 2014
