Section 12 Penal Code (XLV of 1860), section 377 The kidnapping or abduction to target unnatural lust, the benefit of the FIR of suspicion of evidence, which was filed approximately five and a half hours after the alleged incident. Neither the name of the accused, nor the characteristics of the co-accused was shown as the main culprit, but he was later acquitted, and was acquitted, Since the accused's name did not appear in the FIR, it was legally required to have his identity paraded by the victim and two other witnesses, who made him flee the street. There was no record of why the identification parade was not held, both witnesses were related to the complainant, and witnesses of the occasion were not residents of the area concerned, witnessing the incident to someone nearby. Was not made, according to the doctor, the victim's anal sphincter was normal, and there was no panic or lock anal canal ejaculation and there was no difficulty in running the trial court, because the accused was not allowed to punish or punish. Did not, without reasonable doubt, prove the charge against the accused and sentenced the accused by trial. Was set aside, and he was acquitted of the charge by giving him the benefit of the doubt in the circumstances.
