In section 302 (b) and 34 of the testimony (10 of 1984), Article 40 of the murder, the benefit of the doubt as to the value of the joint intention evidence was re-presented in the alleged disclosure of all the facts stated in the FIR. In the alleged record-making disclosure of the accused, the police had already known, when the FIR was registered, that such disclosure had taken place, it was in the meaning of Article 40 of the 1984 law testimony. The discovery of the new reality could not be understood. Submitted by the prosecution's witness, the defendant's involvement in the crime was already excluded; the defendant's conviction, which was a solid piece of evidence, could not even be considered in isolation; in the trial, the failure. Had suffered. The proper scrutiny of the evidence on the record prosecution, by failing to prove the accused against any reasonable suspicion, enhanced the benefit of the doubt. The accused was acquitted in favor of the accused and in the circumstances he was acquitted. Was released
Related judgments — Quetta High Court Balochistan, 2015
