Section 497 of the Conduct Rule (XLV of 1860), Section 302/34 bail, only the eyewitness's grant during the course of its examination in court was not able to identify the accused, stating that he had taken his ul. Has changed. And because of the passage of time he could not identify the other accused in the court, even though the face of the incident was presented as a witness, but he did not see the people who had killed his grandfather. It was committed, especially when she was not in the room, as witnesses stated that she saw only three people entering her grandfather's family. And then he heard the shootings. None of the men, who were present at the detention center, were presented as evidence to confirm that the accused was among the accused who confirmed the murder of the victim. Had committed, after the Chief Inquiry Test, that the witness had not been presented. Again for his cross-examination, as he was reported to have moved the prosecution to an undisclosed location, in the circumstances, was unable to file a bail application for dismissal, due to contradictions that appear on the record. For the purpose of cross-examination of the eyewitness, the eyewitness testimony and the manner in which the accused's identity parade was held, the accused was entitled to the bail, the accused was admitted in bail
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2009
