Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD AKHTAR ALIAS HUSSAINA versus THE STATE

Pakistan Penal Code Section 302/449/34 Crimes of Adultery (Enforcement Hood Ordinance (VII of 1979), Section 10 (4) Anti-Terrorism Act (XVII of 1997), Section 7) The prosecution case of the evidence was that the complaining party The suspect knew that before the incident, the complainant and the prosecution witness had immediately named the accused in their first statement to the police prosecution witness, the incident where the resident was, the incident, He was a natural witness and witnessed during the incident that he himself was the victim of rape, his presence not far from being located in the complainant's residence. And his description of spending the night with his deceased brother was neither unusual nor unnatural, both the complainant and the prosecutor's witness had no background at all. The witnesses persevered with the accused for falsely implicating him. ND's direct statements before the trial court and his statements were greatly supported by medical evidence even though the incident occurred overnight. But the presence of the lantern inside the room where the lure had occurred gave the prosecutor's witness a chance to find him. As one of the offenses. The prosecution had succeeded in establishing the case against the trial, following the trial's allegations, and retained the accompanying accused, who was placed before the Inquiry Officer, or two. He was nominated three days later in a supplementary statement. The incident was not identified at the time of the incident and the complaint witnesses investigated solicitors from Depal Pur lawyer