ABDUL JALIL versus STATE
The definition of evidence under Section 6/9 (c) of the Control of Drugs Act 1997 was defective in the law in this case because of the definition of hemp contained in section 2 (d) (ii) of the alleged substance recovered from the accused. I didn't come. The Control of Narcotic Material Stances Act 1997, the FIR was silent on the weight and seal of the material recovered on the occasion. The counsel was subordinate to the complainant, the evidence of the prosecution of the material discrimination, which was ignored by the trial court. Yes, he was acquitted of the charges.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
famous lower court advocate from Digri lawyer
