HABIBULLAH versus THE STATE
Section 7 evidence7 The testimony of the prosecution case depends mainly on the complainant's bald claim, which itself is insufficient to bring a case under Section 7 377, Section 7 377 of the PPC case against the accused. / 1111,, applied PPC and refused to apply. In Section 7 377, PPC's only FIR, the complainant very clearly stated that the accused had dragged his male organ into the thighs and hips and did not state that the accused had removed his penis. Had entered her anus. In her statement in the case, it is stated that the accused tried to enter her penis under her charge under section 777777, PPC has not proved against the accused in these circumstances. The evidence presented by the prosecution cannot be proved to be below the required standard, not sufficient for the accused to be tried and convicted. Come. Was set aside by the trial court and acquitted of the charges against him.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
top advocates from Kasur lawyer
