Find a Lawyer

MUNIR AHMAD ALIAS SAIEN versus THE STATE

Section 7 377/1111 Z Crimes of Adultery (Enforcement Hood) Ordinance (1979 1979 VII of 1979), Complaint between the complainant and the accused before the alleged incident of Section 12 evidence, the accused falsely implicated the accused in this case. There was no reason to include and dismiss them, the evidence of the prosecution's testimony proved the prosecution's testimony and said that although the prosecution's testimony was related to the complainant, such fact was not alleged by the prosecution witness. Was to falsely impeach the accused, the testimony of the prosecutor's witness, in the circumstances, cannot be excluded, especially when his show Ahad had established the presence of two accused on the spot. The relevant time is the fact that the accused had tried to commit the complaint on the complainant / victim was fully established and the medical evidence also confirmed the same charge under section 37777, PPC along with Section 111111. The PPC had, on the other hand, proved right beyond any doubt against the accused, he was rightly punished for the same punishment which was already alleged to be a minor, not to further reduce it. Shown attorney vs advocate vs counsel from Mohen Jo Daro lawyer