Section 497 (2) of the Criminal Procedure (XLV of 1860), Section 395 of the Contempt of Evidence (1984 of 10), Article 22 Duty Guarantee, additional scope of doubt was charged with non-possession of identity parade and accused of co-accused. At the gunpoint imposed, the accused, who was stripped of the trailer from the complainant, went to the police station to file an FIR but found that the trailer and the accused were locked there. In the present case no material of Prima was available. To show that the defendant immediately caused any wrongdoing or wrongfully withheld the complainant out of fear of death. The evidence required by Mans Rea and Actos again for the theft and recovery of the stolen trailer during the trial is the fact that the identity has not been examined and the accused was found in a police lockup. Doubts in favor of the alleged crime came under the scope of the inquiry as the ingredients for attracting Section 395, PPC needed, were the first evidence to be known through conscious action and not accidentally. Because the joint alliance in the design to commit the crime was guaranteed by the accused in the circumstances.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2014
