Section 337F (i), (iii) and 34 Criminal Code of Conduct (V 1898), Section 417 (2A), because of the trial, the testimony of the defendant was appreciated by the said witness, but the witness testified on behalf of the prosecution. If your statement was not brought before the court for record, it may be pointed out that the witness was not ready to support the prosecution's version. The doctor did not appear in court to record his statement. There was a lot of important and excellent evidence to prove the doctor's injury and non-presentation case, the prosecution will make the case suspicious, many of the eligible people at the scene of the incident. Rad was present, but was not presented as a witness, and only the relevant witnesses. Conflicts between the parties have been acknowledged, the false involvement of the accused person was high, and the recovery witnesses there denied the recovery, which was brought to the testimony of the prosecution witnesses, though only on the basis of the relationship with the complainant. It could not be deleted. And the sentence may be based on a statement of isolation, but in the present case, the statements of the witnesses have been exaggerated. And because of material contradictions in their statements, their truth was required to have an independent trustee in the face of enmity from the accused party, the prosecution was bound to prove the accused's guilt beyond suspicion, however, when eyewitness testimony becomes suspicious, Prosecutors will be skeptical in this case as a whole, there is usually a double chance of innocence in the ordinary course of law as long as the accused is innocent until he is found guilty. And while the other mills by order of evil
Related judgments — Shariat Court Azad Kashmir, 2014
