Section 265K and 561 Crimes of Adultery (Enforcement Hood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), dismissed application for section 11 acquittal filed under section 265K, CR PC for its failure after the arrest of the applicant. Was made but dismissed by the trial court. The same applicant / accused had dismissed the petition under Section 615A, CRPC, that the name of the applicant was not initially mentioned in the FIR against the dismissal order, but it was almost at the time of the incident. years Years later, the complainant recorded his further statement, in which the complainant expressed his suspicion of the applicant, who is related to the original culprits, probably of his allegedly abducted daughter. The address and address may be known, apart from the complainant's suspicion in the applicants, there was no charge against the applicant on the record. Doubt, no matter how strong it may be, may not be the result of a penalty against the person whom the suspects suspect has been shown because the complainant's suspicion is not sufficient to record any conviction, If his conviction against him is not complete, the case cannot be terminated and the proceedings against him will be an abuse of court proceedings, the application of the appeal cant is not allowed, the unclean order was set aside by the trial court and the applicant Was acquitted of the charges under Section 265 K, CR PC
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2009
