Find a Lawyer

AMIR HAYAT versus STATE

The crime of adultery (Enforcement Hood) Ordinance 1979 Section 10 (3) Contempt of Regulations (XLV of 1860), the affirmation of the provisions of Sections 452 and 506 was unacceptable to the victim. The evidence of the victim was neither credible nor reliable. This was confirmed by. There is no other witness that the lady doctor through whom she examined the serologist's report was absent and it is not beyond reasonable doubt that the semen originated either from the accused or from the affected vagina on the case property. The unknown remains at the forefront. The safe custody of the subjects for 1 1/2 months and such cannot be said beyond the scope of doubt that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, was convicted by the trial court and was an accused. It's bad divorce advocates from Mangowal lawyer