Sections 302, 381A, 109 and 34 of the Criminal Procedure Code (V 1898), section 342 suspected the evidence of acts of multiple persons involved in theft, car or other motor vehicle theft, iftar, joint intention. The prosecution's witnesses changed their stance to bring their statements according to the medical evidence. He made contradictory statements about the accused's weapons and his role, and also tried to involve natural witnesses as a resident of the location, who was not willing to support the prosecution's story, but the trial court said. They could not lay the basis for convicting the witnesses for their evil. The trial court had rejected both the witnesses' death sentences while the co-accused were acquitted, so it would not be safe to convict the accused on the same evidence as to make the accused strong and independent, both witnesses relentlessly improving their statements. Lai (Police) Improvement Once Deliberate and Dishonest Finds Serious doubts have been expressed on the authenticity of witnesses No independent evidence was presented No post-mortem inspection delay of 22 hours Regarding FIR registration It was enough to create suspicion and the presence of witnesses at the scene was inconsistent with medical evidence. Same. Scale site plan is 28 feet between the married suspect and the deceased but the victim was hurt Margin FIR hurt the throat and chest of the accused but no post mortem examination showed any such injury. Medical evidence will only reveal the nature of the injury and the weapon used, but such evidence could not identify the faces of the accused. Situated
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2014
