Find a Lawyer

ZAHOOR AHMED versus RUKHSANA KAUSAR

Section 10 (4) of the Sexual Offenses Ordinance 1979, sections 10 (4) of the Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), sections 2 (c), 20 and 25 (7) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (V9 1898), sections 367 (5) and 3 423 (I) (b) definition of evidence The difference in the details of the incident of the victim by the victim was not significant and did not in any way damage the version of the prosecution which is consistent with the testimony of the witnesses. Was. All material points supported the prosecution's version, but they were subpoenaed and subjected to cross-examination by the prosecutor's statements for negligence, the testimony confirmed by the deceased, There was no reason to make false accusations with the accused. By medical evidence, the Chemical Examiner's report and the circumstances of this case were, likewise, properly punished under section 10 (4) of the Crimes of Adultery (Enforcement Hood) Ordinance, 1979, in which only Was sentenced to death. For the crime, however, if the trial court or the appellate court found that the death sentence was not guaranteed in the circumstances of the trial case, the proceedings of section 2 (c), 20 and 25 (7) The look can be less punishing. Reading Sections 367 (5) and 423 (1) (B) of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, the CRPC alleges that even though the victim of adultery with the deceased was offered in the common intention of all of them. The crime was done, but still it didn't happen. Certainly it should be decided that these three accused have committed the second offense after death. If each of the accused is convicted, then in these circumstances the crime will be excessive and unfair. Be sentenced to life imprisonment top civil advocates from Chak Sheza lawyer