THE STATE THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ATA QUETTA versus ABDUL HAMEED
Section 365A, 109 and 34 of the Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Section 7 of the Criminal Code (V9 1898), Section 417 (2A) of kidnapping, theft, joint intent, terrorism for kidnapping or ransom. Appeal Against Breath Appeal Evidence The prosecutor's story was not credible, the complainant was unsure of the date on which he was abducted. And in the absence of it, the other person in the complainant failed to inform the police or file an FIR, with the complainant naming the accused in the FIR, highly suspected that the accused was the complainant. Known by the civil affairs / controversy. Among the parties, a one-year delay in filing an FIR could not be taken lightly, as it faces doubts about the delay in filing an FIR, which can only be condoned if The delay was properly explained. However, in the present case, there was no explanation for the abnormal delay in filing an FIR after one year, as the complainant's demand for payment of the said ransom amount was very doubtful and he did not, in any case, Logic did not appeal. The litigation relates primarily to the statement of the complainant and his mother, who avoided appearing in the trial court. And besides the two witnesses, there was no other independent corroborative evidence on record to link the accused with the Investigation Officer of the charges, not sure about the truth of the prosecution case itself. The court properly acquitted the accused, someone directly
Related judgments — Quetta High Court Balochistan, 2015
