Section 666 of the Anti-Terrorism Act (of XXVII of 1997 XX XX), section / testimony of rape and conviction of evidence of terrorism, the lack of examination at the head of both eye witnesses made it clear that the prosecution case Their statements about the key dimensions of the case - the time and place of the incident, the nomination of the accused, the commission's special commitment to the victim of the minor - were consistent with each other and their testimony at the time and place of the two witnesses' presence. Probable and plausible reasons for presenting both witnesses' testimony was intrinsic to the value of facts and inherent value and safe. Reka was reliable In spite of examining both witnesses, nothing was excluded in favor of the crime which the medical evidence produced by the prosecution did not obtain sufficient evidence in the ocular account, resulting in the trust. An effective account can be evaluated on. Having corroborated the medical evidence, it was concluded that the prosecution had substantially established the commission of the minor victim abuse charge against the accused, after which the witnesses were accompanied by his shalwar. The behavior of the accused after fleeing the place also indicated his offense under section 7 (1). The Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, the two witnesses did not utter a word in their examination regarding the prevention of panic, terror, fear or insecurity in the public or the area as a result of the alleged incident. That the panic spread throughout the area after the incident was neither credible nor encouraging to say that the witness was in hereditary question without any confirmation.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2011
