Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD MUKHEEB versus THE STATE

Sections 497 (2) of the Criminal Procedure (XLV of 1860), Sections 294, 342, 355, 377, 506 and 511 of the Crimes of Adultery (Enforcement Hood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), Sections 12 and 18 of bail, and further inquiries The charge was that they picked up the victims in the forest with the intention of having sexual intercourse and at the pistol point they took off their clothes and took pictures of them and threatened to inform anyone. And when they tried to commit misconduct, the victims raised a gun and due to resistance from one of the victims, the pistol fell under an accused and the victims fled. Parties dragged the case out of court The contents of the FIR show that the accused was busy removing the clothes of the victims and it is alleged that the photographs could be made of allegations by the Commission. Indicating that they were attracted, but otherwise, it was clear in the circumstances that the provisions of Section 355, PPC existed under the trial and the offenses under which the prohibited clause of section 497 Didn't even come under investigation, until the investigating officer revealed that the camera could not be produced for the purpose of printing or photographing the situation. I was accused of further investigation. Under the circumstances, they entered on bail top civil advocates from Chak 4 b c lawyer