Articles 2 302, & Q & am 506 Katil Am, joint intent, criminal threats Defining evidence ation 12 Two burglary offenses, which were seized from the scene of the incident, were sent to the forensic science laboratory with weapons in the expert's crime. ? Laboratory feedback indicates that when the recovery method proved, it was removed from the weapon. And it has also been established that the guns fired on the spot were fired with a twelve-barreled gun, while the reporters, for example, failed to tell the exact date. It was not enough, therefore, that the recovery of the weapons was suspicious of the crime, especially when they were examined more than a year after the date, and there was a danger of recovery where eyewitnesses were available. And after cross-examination tests, their evidence proved to be valid, no change in the statements of witnesses to the recovery of the weapons of crime, You dance And it would not affect the evidence of witnesses, who had to rely on the claim that he suffered injuries during the incident, he was without any substance, which deserved no consideration. It was alleged that he was killed by the accused along with 12 bore. The riot caused the unhappiness that occurred one day before the incident between the complainant's nephew and the suspect's grandchildren, and the location of the incident was not disputed, according to witnesses at the scene. At the relevant time, the fact was established that the witnesses belonged to the deceased and the complainant was not sufficient to dismiss their evidence carefully, eyewitness account
Related judgments — Shariat Court Azad Kashmir, 2014
