Section 2 302 / at34 Katil-Am, the testimony of the joint intention evidence was presented to three of the four witnesses testified by the prosecution, while the fourth witness was left, two of the two witnesses, the deceased's real brother, While the third was his first. Cousins were reported at about 1:30 in the morning and 30 minutes into the night, and the location of the incident was located at a considerable distance from the witnesses' residence, saying the witnesses claimed that they saw light in the moonlight and the torch. The suspects have been identified. , Which came from a great distance, had to be carefully and carefully examined, when the prosecution's story was not understandable when viewed in the light of the witnesses' statements, because the prosecution failed to prove the fact of the conspiracy. No evidence was brought. The presence of witnesses on the spot on the record, in particular, from a comparative study of their statements, appeared to be suspicious, with the site's Pane and Medico legal reports identifying the suspect and the firing distance of 270 feet in the moonlight. Light was not possible Even in the moonlight, it was impossible for the witnesses to flee in different directions. At the scene of the incident, suspicion appeared, the firing distance was accurately described by the witnesses, and each witness stated the same distance as the other witness, as described in detail by the narrator. Suspicious Medico was made. Legal reports and site plans, contradicting witnesses, and serious suspicion in the prosecution's story. When statements and post-mortem reports were put on the spot, suspicion of the presence of witnesses at the location of the incident was made.
Related judgments — Supreme Court Azad Kashmir, 2013
