Law:

Section:

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302(b), 392, 411, 460 & 34---Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), S.7---Qatl-i-amd, robbery, dishonestly receiving stolen property, lurking house trespass by night, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Delay of 20 hours in lodging the FIR was alarming---Both the prosecution witnesses who accompanied the complainant, were residents of distant place away from the place of occurrence---Time in between the injuries and postmortem examination ranged between 18 and 36 hours---Possibility, in view of facts and circumstances of the case, could not be ruled out that the occurrence was committed by someone who was welcomed in the house, with whom the time was consumed; and subsequent to that due to one reason or the other the occurrence had taken place---Statements of the complainant and other prosecution witnesses, seemed an afterthought---Recovery of certain articles from accused persons, also became doubtful---Motive of the case was remote and prosecution had failed to substantiate the motive, either during the course of investigation or during the course of trial---Possibility could not be ruled out that judicial confession of accused was procured while using third-degree, and such confession had no legal value, especially when same was retracted---Both the prosecution witnesses of last seen hailed from a place 30 kilometers away from place of occurrence, and they could not explain the purpose for which they had visited place of occurrence---Whole prosecution case was based upon circumstantial evidence, and to base conviction on circumstantial evidence there should be interlinking chain of credible and cogent corroborative evidence available on record, which was totally missing in the case---Whole prosecution case seemed to be hinging upon conjectures and surmises creating serious doubts about its authenticity; same could not be taken as proof to bring home guilt of accused in the case of capital charge---Prosecution version was burdened/loaded with major discrepancies, which had created serious doubts in its authenticity---Prosecution version with regard to manner of approaching the complainant and the prosecution…