SALEEM @ SAFIQ @ GUCHHAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Applicant is in Judicial custody since 1.5.2003. Trial is still on. Alleged eye witness has not supported the prosecution. Wife of the deceased has also not implicated the applicant. Three public witness. namely, Mohd. Anjar, Mohd. Sabir and Mohd. Nabab are yet to be examined. Statements of these 3 persons recorded under Sec. 161 Code Criminal Procedure would suggest at best an enmity between the deceased and the applicant.

(2.) If Mohd. Anjar, Mohd. Sabir and Mohd. Nabab support the prosecution, their evidence would at best establish a motive.

(3.) Motive is a presumptive evidence and by itself would fall short of a conviction if not corroborated by other evidence.