Find a Lawyer

IJAZ AHMAD versus THE STATE

Section 808080 (Enforcement Hood) Ordinance of Adultery (VII of 1979 1979, 1979), sections 10 (4) and 16 of the definition of adulteration and theft of the adultery Bill to harm them and to include them in this case with false and malicious intent. For, the medical examiner who was examined was also presented to the magistrate, but she was not mentally alert because she was very upset when the prosecutor returned a few days later, before the magistrate. Which he recorded in his statement where he confessed during the investigation that he had been terrified of the accused's unconstitutional action, so the letter S failed to raise the alarm, police emphasized in relation to the prosecution's conduct in not reacting to the situation. The conduct of a post incident cannot be predicted by the witness as it varies from person to person because different people behave in different cases if there is no treatment for the witness or victim. Not only was the prosecution a constant threat to the accused, but his children, as well as the defendant, said the incident was not natural after the prosecution. The delay in reporting the case to the police was reasonably explained by the defense evidence, which did not create any conviction, the accused did not prove the innocence, only recovering 5,000 from the accused at his house. There were no specific marks of identification of the currency notes were made in the FIR or in the statement of the complainant prosecutor, under the circumstances, under section 80, under 80, the accused under section 808080 against the accused under PPC To do badly lawer from fb area from Chak Jhumra lawyer