Sections 2 (2 (b), 7 i7a (ii), 7 (if (i) (i) and 7 e7l (2)) Qutel Amad, which led to the birth of Shuja-e-Khalifa, Damiya and Badiyah and Other injuries occurred and the result of the dispute due to the appreciation of the evidence, in this case, was a passageway, which, according to the complainant, was present on the spot and the suspects were there when the trainees with the tractors were able to demolish the same dispute. On the other hand, there was no other prosecution version like this - the fight took place when the accused wanted to demolish the corridor, was wrong with the record, while the defense version that the complainant had The party wanted to construct an illegal pass, this was true and the prosecutor's witnesses did not blame the accused for any particular injury - and only the general role of the injury was attributed. It has been proved that the complaining party resorted to lawlessness, and the accused had lodged an FIR in the complainant's land saying that the two accused were also injured at the time of the incident, but neither of their injuries was significant. It has not been mentioned nor stated how he suffered the wounds; the complainant tried to hide the fact. In the event of the injuries to the accused, it was shown that the complaining party was also armed. The accused had the right to defend himself, extending to his people and property, and the defense version was far closer to the facts. And the prosecution's trial court had failed to keep the facts of the case, and did not, in its original context, interpret the evidence, it was alleged, to be the subject of any crime.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2014
