Section 2302 (b) Qatil Um appreciated the evidence. The importance of the child's testimony was directly and equally imposed for the victim's murder, and the complainant's story appealed to the prosecutor's witness, who was the victim's brother, and the child of the age. At the time of the incident, there was a straightforward witness of 7/8, and it was not expected that he would manipulate any of the events shown. From what he saw, he described it to his father / complainant. Therefore, the child was a natural witness. The complainant had no good intention to falsely implicate the accused because no evidence was brought to the record by the defense to prove the complainant's previous motives, both of the prosecution's witnesses being long and combative investigations. Defenses were made, but nothing could be concluded that the witnesses were up to their point. The ocular account presented by the prosecution's witness was corroborated by circumstantial evidence and in the event of recovery of blood stained ground from the scene of the incident, the last blood-stained clothing, as well as the presence of the deceased were posted. The autopsy report also took place in the manner and manner in which the prosecution's witnesses expressed minor contradictions in the prosecutor's statement, in the prosecution's case there would be no fatalities, as the defendant, who remained absconding, had a ten-year long trial. The investigation was made after a long period of time, which was straightforward, reliable and inspiring. The incident was not possible that he was alone when the witness statement by a witness to prove the truth
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2015
