Find a Lawyer

GHULAM HAIDER versus STATE

The raiding case against the accused, sections 156 (1), 89 and 178 of the Customs Act 1969, on the partial investigation by the party in charge of the raiding party, could not even object to the recovery of gold at trial and the witnesses. The recovery memo was completely proved by. And statements of such witnesses were not challenged in the interdisciplinary examination; witnesses could not be presented to the public because of the influence of the accused, otherwise, it was common knowledge that respected civil smugglers and Counselors and limber guards, afraid of bad characters, had the prosecutor's sole justification not to present witnesses to the public, especially when they were not needed, and the accused was arrested on the spot and led to the recovery of five gold slabs. Such fact was made up by the statement of the prosecution witness who was a senior policeman. The party was not a member of the raiding party after it was fully proved against the officer and the accused, he was rightly punished and sentenced. divorce advocates from Dargai lawyer