Section 302 (b) Definition of Evidence The benefit of the doubt was lodged an FIR with a delay of two hours. Three brothers were involved in the case, of which only the accused had faced trial and according to the prosecution. One of his brothers was injured in the burglary for the deceased, but the FIR neither mentions the casualty's seat, nor does his suffering be specifically attributed to him. A similar role was assigned to the accused and his brother, but his aforesaid brother never prosecuted and the complainant did not. The complainant did not feel this way while witnessing the incident, otherwise he would not have informed the co-accused, who was the victim of the wounds, the accused would have spent some time wounding the deceased and eyewitnesses. , If present, they have intervened or at least they can raise the alarm to attract neighbors in the post-mortem investigation. He reinforced the view that the accused did not know about the complaining party. The witness, who lived 60 km from the location of the recovery, dismissed the knife recovery and did not state before the trial court that he was. Evidence of blood stain recovery, therefore, was not credible. The stimulus was relieved on the benefit of the doubt after the circumstances.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
