Section 265 K & 561 A Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Section 337 J Offense for Adultery (Enforcement Hood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), Section 10 (3) Injury by Poison Bill and Injury due to Adultery The petition against the dismissal of the petition was supported by a trial court-approved order hearing the petitioner's petition, whereby his application for a dismissal under section 6565K, CCP, was denied. , The initial allegation made by the complainant of giving intoxicating rice was misrepresented by the Chemical Examiner's report. Chemical Examiner found in the material sent for the report was later charged with adultery under Section 10 (3) of the Adultery Enforcement (Hoodwood) Ordinance 1979, through a supplementary statement. Three out of three were charged with adultery Two victims refused medical examination It is stated that someone, along with Xena, committed the third person, under section 161, in his statement. The CR PH advertisement involved one of the accused for the commission of adultery, but through DNA test reports, accusations of adultery were also mistaken that the accused's DNA It does not match the DNA of the person who allegedly committed adultery In the present case, there was no prosecution. The evidence against the applicants and the allegation against the applicants was unfounded. In this case, the proceedings of the trial will be based on the substance of the law and the applicants will have no possibility of conviction. The decision of the case was dismissed and the application under the CCPC, section 65KK
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010
