Find a Lawyer

ABDUL RAUF versus STATE

Criminal Code of Conduct (CRPC) Section 497 Offense Hood (Enforcement Hood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), Section 10 (2) Bail, FIR grant was filed after the alleged incident on thirteen days and It was said that there was no plausible explanation for the delay. There was a reduction in the FIR provided by the content of the prosecution against the alleged abduction, harassment and adulteration charges, except for the words of the alleged abductor complainant / husband which was the act of abduction, harassment or fornication. Was not present, there was no other witness. The only evidence that was cited or examined was that the victim / prosecutor's allegation was obtained from the accused's home, either in the scope of the Section 10, Adultery (Ordinance Hood) Ordinance 1979 From there the confession of the accused should be a crime. The commission of the crime, or at least four adult men, should be Muslim, who has an unrecognizable role, who has witnessed the act of penetration, and says that there is a lack of prosecution against all these elements. The accused, Section 497 (1), was not subjected to the prohibited clause under the CRPC but required further investigation under Section 497 (2), the CCP is entitled to bail the accused under the circumstances. Was list of supreme court advocates from Choppar Hatta lawyer