Find a Lawyer

SAJJAD AHMAD versus THE STATE

Adultery of the Adultery (Enforcement Hood) Ordinance 1979 Sections 10 (3) and 10 (3) / 18 of the three witnesses who did not show any wrongdoing or any wrongdoing against the accused, made it to the commission of the crime. Was fully involved and his evidence could not be ruled out for the smallest reasons given by the trial court defense that the girl herself wanted to marry the accused and was denied in this case. So, this is how it happened. The benefit of the doubt in relation to the actual act of adultery can be extended to the accused, as the circumstances of the case may extend to the suspect in light of the suspected nature of the Lady Doctor's report on the child's hymen. Access to the offense required to commit the offense of adultery has not been successful and the crime cannot be more than the punishment of the accused under section 10 (3) of the Adultery (Enforcement Hood) Ordinance 1976. 9, consequently read in section 18 with section 10 (3) of the said ordinance and was sentenced to five years imprisonment under this section, taking advantage of Section 382B, the appeal of the PC under it. Deleted advocate for immigration from Quaidabad lawyer