Section 18 Testimony of Evidence All three witnesses cited three contradictory versions of the incident and it was very difficult to decide which version was correct was the result of wrong judgment and misinterpretation of evidence and there were no legs to stand on. The complainant and his brother seemed to have sexual relations and wherever they see a man and a woman together, they will conclude that adultery is so unnatural and contradictory in the minds of men and women. It cannot be believed that the prosecution had been falsely implicated in the case because of the complainant's mind and the deliberate nature of the political enmity between him and her, even before the trial court's commission. The prosecution had denied the reference. Without any evidence on the record by the adulterer and instead on the record, it was concluded that the accused had pressured him to commit the offense of adultery, if it had not been interfered with. Under the Ordinance 1979, the accused was convicted under section 18 of the Ordinance 1979, only because there were men and women present. The accused had no legal or moral right to impose his own version of morality and piety, and the accused was acquitted according to what he had lied in the process. \ R \ n
