Section 302/34 Criminal Code of Conduct (v. 1898), section 417 was charged with appeal for the benefit of the doubt because no one from the complaining party had seen the person committing the murder of the accused, Because neither the complainant nor the prosecution witnesses. At the time of the incident, the prosecution witnesses at the scene who are said to have witnessed the incident did not support the prosecution's case, even under section 164, of the women's co-accused. The statement, which relates to the CCP, can be said to have been pregnant at the time of the incident, and six days after the incident, she gave birth to a baby. In such a situation, it was absolutely incredible that the deceased saw him in a questionable location for ten minutes with the male suspect, the record did not reveal how the female suspect was charged in the case. The wounds on the body of the accused were not specified. The prosecution's contradictions were found in the deposition of the prosecution witnesses, which led to the suspicion and the alleged knife recovered from the female accused was not a blood stain, the evidence presented by the prosecution provided false evidence. No suspects were found and no wrong decision was made. And the trial court rightly acquitted the accused of the benefit of the doubt
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2009
