Section 302 (b) Definition of Qatil-e-Amad evidence The benefit of the doubt was neither assigned a role to the accused nor was he charged by name in the FIR unless the FIR also had the characteristics of the accused. The presence of eyewitnesses on the spot, the identity of the accused, and his arrest were not justified because the evidence of the prosecution was not influenced by the trust found in the statements of the complainant and other alleged witnesses. However, the identity was not paraded. The fact that a report was lodged against the unidentified criminals was, in the circumstances, very important in investigating the false implications of the accused's identity and the accused's involvement in the commission of the crime, in which case the prosecutor stated. Was. Eyewitnesses have no reason to arrest and identify the suspect. And the whole story of the prosecution regarding the identity and arrest of the accused has erased the contents of the FIR, the victim's statement, and the prosecution's witnesses, in hot words between the accused and the victim; but in his court statement he The accused and the deceased were abusing each other. It is said that the improvements have shaken the authenticity of both alleged witnesses. At the time of the incident, the suspect's identity and his arrest were highly suspected that the best evidence available to the prosecutor was withheld, a negative indication could be drawn against the prosecutor, allegedly franc science related to 30 bore vacancies. The laboratory's positive report recovered from the opportunity, there was no benefit to the prosecution, as the accused
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2014
