KAMRAN ALIAS KAMI versus THE STATE THROUGH ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE-GENERAL, MIRPUR
Section 377 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Offenses for Adultery (Enforcement Hood) Act 1985, Section 12 Sodomy Repression of Evidence of Evidence, reduction of doctor, after receiving report from Chemical Examiner, issued final medical report, stating After filing an FIR with the affected woman, the adultery was delayed by four and a half hours where family dignity or respect was involved and a child was defamed. People were reluctant to file a report to the police. And it was a natural way for the father to have the affected person consult his relatives, whether to file a report or not. And after a consultation, she filed a delay in filing an FIR, in which case it was natural and in this case it was not material where an 11-year-old child could be defamed all her life, no father would be innocent. Does not involve a person in a false case. The witnesses of the trial were credible, based on the statement of the victim, the accused was convicted and the Medical Legal Report considered the trial court as well as the contentious evidence. The Shariat court fully appreciated the evidence and agreed with the trial court's decision. What the prosecutor's witnesses relied on was the fact that the witness was as effective as any other witness, provided he did not have an unethical attitude towards the accused and intended to involve the accused in a false case. Yes, the victim's solitary statement was enough to convict the offender. If this was a conviction then the victim, the Mido Legal Report and the statement of the statement proved an effective case against the accused.
Related judgments — Supreme Court Azad Kashmir, 2012
