Sections 497 of the Conduct Rule (XLV of 1860), Sections 302, 394, 397 and 34 of Kotal Amad, a robbery and joint-purpose guarantee, the grant of dignity liability taken by the accused was that he did not revoke his objection. Whether or not the accused was fired would not matter to the deceased or not, but the matter was actually a charge and a crime and the presence of the accused at the scene of the incident was not denied because he was there. Was arrested and both the accused and the co-accused committed the crime in a pre-planned manner and at a pre-concert. In which an innocent person lost his life, the existence of a joint intention between the persons involved in the crime was an essential factor for the applicants of Section 34, jointly with several persons accused of the crime. The Act must not be the same or similar measures may be different. In order to attract the delivery of Section 34, it must be followed by a common intention, PPC accused joint intent with joint accused, commission was guaranteed for murder and robbery.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2014
