Section 426 of the Criminal Procedure (XLV of 1860), Sections 324, 337A (II) and 448 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974), Section 42 Qatil-e-Amm and suspension of the principles of punishment for corruption in the home. There were very strong foundations. Necessary for the suspension of the sentence; there must be a strong and logical reasoning, by which it can be ascertained that the sentence will not be sustained. One should not comment or comment on matters without considering the facts. On the merits of the trial, when the dispute requires consideration of eligibility, the appellate court will refrain from enjoying such arguments; in the present case, the accused was convicted by the trial court and the Shariat court granted bail. No unusual circumstances were shown allowing. The accused's lawyer cannot even identify the unusual circumstances on which it can be said that he was entitled to suspension. The sentence awarded by the court should not be taken lightly or suspended as usual. Should be done, but there must be something in it. According to the compelling and concrete reasons for the suspension of the sentence, the court was not supposed to suspend the sentence only in the lower case. The court should suspend the sentence only after considering whether the offender has been tried initially and in the appeal. The punishment is likely to be set aside. The appellate court should not re-define the entire evidence, but should only restrict its sentence to instability. Make sure that the trial court's decision
Related judgments — Supreme Court Azad Kashmir, 2010
