The accused were accused of defining Section 6634 / Pro34 criminal code of conduct (v. 1898), Article 265 D'A testimony (10 of 1984), Article 3 rape and commonwealth evidence that they filed against the Complainant Trial Court. Committed rape with Sentenced the accused and sentenced them to life imprisonment. A joint charge was made against the accused but no special charge was made against one of the accused for committing adultery and the terms of Section 265D, CRPC were missing to the extent that the trial in the witnesses The court made a special question on which the court observed that the witness did not understand the questions, but in the interest of justice, his statement was recorded in which he stated that one of the accused committed a rape bill while the other remained. Armed with a pistol and the complainant arrived outside the house (the scene of the incident) but remained outside and could not see the incident, but did not come into the house. , She could not describe the incident by providing the necessary details, the victim's statement was required to be recorded in accordance with Article 3 of the testimony of the law, 1984, and could not be preferred to express the interest of justice. The basic law-based provisions of the administration of justice did not understand the question of the vital importance of the Victim Tender Age, and otherwise victims of rape could not forget the torture of the series of real works for the rest of their lives. The act required to punish the accused and the accused in the court could not identify the culprits, the medical officer stated that no traces of violence were found on any part of the victim's body. With both hands behind
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2013
