Section 2302 (b) Definition of Evidence The benefit of the doubt was lodged with reasonable promptness because the defendant was identified in the light of day due to his knowledge of the complaint and the accused's false involvement in the matter or alternatives. The question did not arise as witnesses were naturalistic witnesses to the incident while he was living in the same house when he was the deceased's real father and brother, witnessing another eye in the same compound and witnessing his presence was also natural. There was no prior rivalry between the parties, with slight differences and slight improvement over time as witnesses' statements did not result in trial. The trial will begin and there will be no special barrier to ocular testimony. The evidence of eyewitnesses cannot be excluded simply because the relationship was sent to the forensic science laboratory against their alleged crimes. Recovery of the weapon from the suspect, after the possibility of Sam being manipulated by the police, could not be ruled out, the medical evidence had indeed confirmed the ocular account and the conviction of the accused was maintained in the circumstances. In the case of, there will be an equal case with the partner who is acquitted, if there is evidence. This excluded the recovery of the arms of the crime, which had already been rejected by the High Court, therefore, in view of the rule of consistency, he too deserved to be acquitted, and thus, on the benefit of the doubt, he was acquitted. Done.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2009
