Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD NASIR versus STATE

Section 497 (2) Crimes of Adultery (Enforcement Hood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), Section 10 (4) Guarantee, two days late FIR was granted, according to the FIR, no power, He was not employed by the accused. Instead of abducting the victim, he did not voluntarily accuse the accused in his statement of rape against the accused, nor did he accuse him of selling his main co-accused and Another participant in the case, who was accused of the same role, had already been released on bail, therefore, further investigation was required under section 497 (2), for the CRPC accused to be absconding. No doubt, he would usually lose even his minor rights, including bail in such crimes, but such a principle would be one of the further investigations into the matter. Let's go to the issue can not be ignored in favor of the right to be entitled to this guarantee, the accused was entitled to bail on the principles of consistency. The conviction of the accused in jail for 1/2 year in this case has yet to be decided. The preliminary result of the trial was the basic right of the accused, which was denied, allowed to bail I could allow the accused. best law firms from Naukundi lawyer