Find a Lawyer

NAZIR AHMAD versus STATE

Sections 5, 7 and 10 of the Conduct Rule (XLV of 1860), defining the evidence against the section 500 allegations, were made as witnesses against their brother during the trial of the dissolution of marriage by the accused's brother's first wife. Investigating it, it was alleged that the complainant with whom the accused's brother had committed the second marriage was pregnant with his brother before his marriage and his role was false. In his statement, the allegations leveled against him were false, baseless. And she was calculated to bring a bad name to society because her testimony in her gross examination has confessed that she was being sued by someone over her pending litigation between her husband and his first wife. I was not informed that her husband had reported the allegations. In her statement by the accused in the suit, the complainant also admitted that she was not present in the complainant's court husband during her cross-examination, in violation of the accused's alleged statement in the family matter at the time of the rack, It also admitted that the complainant was not present in court at the time of recording the accused's unwanted statement. The person who told the complainant that his brother (the accused) had alleged the complainant's claim that the accused had said derogatory words against him, should be considered merely heard, in which case he was slightly Clear value was taken, and the verbal statement of the brother of the accused in connection with the charges was not considered before the trial for resolving the dispute involved in the case. advocates from Wan Radha Ram lawyer