Find a Lawyer

AAMIR MUSHTAQ versus STATE

There was no medical evidence on record to substantiate the commission of adultery by the accused's testimony of section 10 (2) The evidence of six police witnesses did not even reveal any such action by the accused. The complainant, the father of the woman accused, also did not say that the accused had committed adultery, though he filed an FIR several days later after the alleged lure of his daughter's father, a prosecution witness, in which the female accused. The employee was acting as a maid, no doubt, the two accused committed adultery, but admitted that they themselves were involved in the case. The pace was up and he could not explain how the male suspect had arrived at his house to commit adultery, the trial had failed to carefully analyze the evidence and he had merely sentenced the culprit. The charge against the accused under section 10 (2) of the Adultery (Enforcement Hood) Ordinance 1979 was not proved by the evidence on record. Left in the situation immigration advocate from Haveli Kahuta lawyer