The complainant was not present at his home at the time of the incident, but he had stated in the FIR that, while firing, he and his brother arrived at the house and saw the accused as complainant. Version was completely rejected. His daughters and wife said he had come home about half an hour after the incident and they had narrated the incident to him. The complainant's version is that he came home from the shooting, then was denied by the witnesses of the star, because according to the statement of the medical officer, any of the suspects had aerial fire, the complainant and the prosecutor in the FIR The witnesses were reasonably suspicious and in statements under Section 161, the CRPC did not say that the accused was trying to open the tape. The affected girl's pants, but at the time of the evidence they improved their statements. It was alleged that he was a sibling and a son who was the complainant's cousin, the relationship between the parties in view of such blood, it cannot be believed that one brother was present in the presence of another brother. Would do such an ugly move with the woman they had a close relationship with. All things raised doubts and thus the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond any matter. The shadow of suspicion was cleared of the accused
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2009
