The testimony of section 13 (d) unauthorized possession of a firearm by the accused in his statement under section 234 under, was not discussed, understood or appreciated by the trial court, the trial court Had made a mistake in estimating the value of the Kalashnikov rifle, which was about Rs. 1,20,000 to Rs. 1,50,000, showing the source of his personal information. And to see that it was not possible for the investigating officer to purchase two Kalashnikovs, based on the speculation, compromises and speculations of the trial court's observation of the execution of two people, and the result of misreading and not reading the evidence, Which is available on the record. The trial court's decision was a violation of the principles of law, trial facts, and criminal justice that could not be sustained, by the number of private individuals in the area, and even when the prior notice was received, the alleged incident was seen. went. The accused, called by a policeman to act as a daily adviser or witness, was not even presented to prove the movement from the police station to the location of the weapon. From the list of 23 witnesses mentioned by the prosecutor in the charge sheet examined by the prosecution, the prosecutor examined only two witnesses, the Star Witness AF Prosecution, which was an Investigation Officer, to be involved in the murder case of the accused's brother. Because he was outraged by the accused, his evidence, on the statements of only two police officers, could not be declared a conviction of a trustworthy conviction and the accused's credibility, did not agree with the safe administration of justice according to the law of justice. It should be dismissed, and it should be given to a judge
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2014
