Find a Lawyer

KANEEZ FATIMA versus STATE

Criminal Procedure for Adultery (Enforcement Hood) Ordinance 1979 Section 16 Criminal Procedure Code (V9 1898), Sections 265 K and 439 FIR Complaint for the Involvement of Women Involved (Co-accused), His Mother and Sister The abductor and the abductor could not be ascertained as the date of the incident was rejected by the Sessions Court in the petition under Section 265 K, CR PC of the said female accused, both of them nominated in the FIR. And that the charge was made after using the material available on the record, without the evidence being recorded, the possibility of punishment could not be ruled out. The dog The fact is that the complainant allegedly committed communion or, with the help of a mother and the younger sister of the abductor, could not be taken as the truth of the gospel and was not accepted despite the words designated in fact. Should have done The FIR should not take any action to punish the abducted women for any reason that they belonged to, and such allegation was that they were blasphemous, devilish and devilish and serious. Was not worth considering. It was alleged that the accused must be cleared of a criminal case. The whole system was mocked, which made the purpose of repealing the purpose for which the provisions of section 265K were made under Article 265 K, CR. Part of the PC was made, the court allowed an arbitrary discretion to promote justice that did not depend on the recording of evidence and could be based on the pernicious material submitted by police courts to do justice. It was needed and it came to fruition immigration advocate from Dera Ghazi Khan lawyer