Find a Lawyer

SHER MUHAMMAD versus STATE

Prohibited Order 1979 Article Article 3 The definition of evidence was full of contradictions in the case against the accused and he was not free from any doubt and the FIR has shown that the reference to the red / Datsun MacCarrot. Was given in which the drugs were recovered. The vehicle was being transported by the accused, but the receipt of the Toyota CarAS memorandum in Colonel No. 5 of the final challan / dotscoll showed that 105kg / opium was recovered from the vehicle, but it was reported in the same memo. The investigating officer eventually said that the vehicle used for the crime was searched at the police station \ C at, but his own marsala indicated that the vehicle was searched at the location. , Where he was subdued after being chased. The drug was supplied only four days after the recovery, and did not say why such material was kept and to whom it was monitored, which was the section HO, itself Invoice. Although the targeting officer and a retrieval witness and free persons were available, no independent person was included as a retrieval witness and no reasonable explanation was given of such error. The defendant was sentenced and sentenced by trial for not being released. Put them aside to give them the benefit of the doubt and they were acquitted of the charge best advocate from Domeli lawyer