Section 2 (2 (b) and Q 34 Qatil Adham) Review of the evidence The benefit of the doubt again was obtained by two witnesses, the deceased's father and brother-in-law, who were witnesses to the case and related to the deceased and received no independent support or cooperation. The witnesses claimed that although they lived about a kilometer away from the incident, they were present on the day of the incident as they were working as laborers in a project near the trial court. The witnesses failed to establish the reason for their presence near the spot at the relevant time as they failed to present any plan in which they were involved. The name of the contractor who hired them as a laborer was not disclosed to any of the under construction project in the formal site project prepared by the project related pavements that filed an FIR instead of incident. The FIR was lodged with a significant delay and the next afternoon was intermittently murdered in connection with the post mortem examination. Wasted time preparing a story for, the trigger for the incident was set by the prosecution The Taliban refused to consider, even though firearms were recovered from the accused, but in the absence of any crime, such recovery was declared to be legally unforgettable distance from which the shot was shot. Witnesses testified that no evidence of medical evidence could be found, the prosecution had failed to prove their case against the accused beyond any reasonable doubt. There is no doubt about this
