Section 302 (b) of the evidence was not known to the accused before the complainant and the prosecutor's witness, while the complainant was the nephew of the complainant and the prosecution witness did not know of any unknown culprit who kept the victim with a pistol. Was taken hostage. At his temple, while one of the three men was pulling money out of the pocket in front of the deceased's shirt. And when the victim saw the complainant and the prosecution's witnesses, the victim rang the alarm on which the accused had mounted the knife on the victim. It is surprising that the deceased, despite hitting the knife directly on the walls of the heart. Was also in a position to speak. And tell the prosecution's witnesses the names of the accused, the parents and the addresses of the two co-accused, while for some time the prosecution's witnesses must have used the accused in the pursuit and the two co-accused Ocular's account directly contradicted the medical evidence. There was considerable doubt about the presence of the complainant and the prosecution's witnesses in the case of the prosecution when the victim was executed by some criminals even if it was assumed that the victim had committed the crime of the accused and the accomplices. If anonymity was made, it was necessary to hold the identity parade of the accused and others to establish the identity of the accused. According to two other laws which were not done, therefore, it cannot be said that the prosecution has made any reasonable doubt. Except for the accused, the case was adjourned. He and the accused were acquitted and released from the charge
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2009
