Sections 302 (b), 337 F (i) (ii) (iv) and 34 Qtl e amd, which led to the appreciation of the evidence of Damiya, Badia, Madiha, Joint Intent, to inform the police of the case or The presence of a conscious delay was especially possible and natural for the complainant's house, his son and j to break into the strange hours of the night, when all told three witnesses of the incident. Although no light source was mentioned, there was some moonlight, and there was electric light at the time. Both sides are residents of the same area and know each other, there is a question of misidentification of the accused. ? Will not be produced on any one of the prosecution's witnesses, who was dumb, was not considered by the trial court, because of the injuries he suffered, and was promptly taken into consideration against the quality of the accused. Was excluded, not the amount of evidence that would disprove the accused's guilt or innocence even after the testimony of the witness was excluded, evidence of the testimony of the complainant and other prosecutors remained. The medical evidence, consistent with the general account, the recovery of the dagger on the suspect's report, was unusual, because, in the recovery memo, it was not mentioned anywhere. He was blood-stained, and the serologist had no knowledge that the dagger was on record had failed to establish the motive portion of the osecution incident, that the victim was not declared to have suffered any injuries or that anyone else was a bad partner. , While the defendant was consistently attributed to the dagger of the witnesses, the complainant and other prosecutor, whose confession was a straightforward and trustworthy account, with the help of medical evidence, section 302 (b).
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2014
