Section 411 Receiving stolen property fraudulently (motorcycle) Testimonial of testimony After receiving a notification on the telephone, without any hard and reliable evidence, hearing the alleged information received by the complainant, Nor was such a aspect of the case, nor the trial court attended, nor could the appellate court, despite the question of the accused, the prosecution's dishonesty and knowledge, also prove that the defendant did not. The motorcycle was stolen on the property when the accused, who was allegedly robbed, was only 10 years old and could not be considered. Given that the accused committed the robbery on his own, the question of receiving stolen property would not be helpful in the circumstances in which the prosecutor was bound to establish the facts by which the court could identify the accused, or so Reasonable grounds for knowing that the motorcycle was stolen, but the prosecutor failed to do so without dishonesty, after which they became aware. The accused could not register any crime against the accused rule, which stipulated that the prosecutor had to prove his case beyond the shadow of a doubt, as long as the accused proved himself innocent. No, unless the culprit is proven, it will inevitably be extended. The accused and otherwise the prosecution failed to establish that the motorcycle was questionable, the accused acquitted of the accused on bail, his bail was dismissed after the appeal expired.
Related judgments — Quetta High Court Balochistan, 2015
