DRIS versus STATE
Controlled by Section 9 (b) of the Drug Control Act 1997, the value of evidence was maintained at the Case Police Station and sent to the Chemical Examiner after a six-month unclear delay. There was no independent consultant involved in the recovery process. Even a fake customer was not sent to the intoxicating location when after the accused received information about the sale of the drug, he was neither presented to the court nor shown to the accused while Section 342, CR. Your statement was recorded under PC. The entry of the Daily Diary on the departure of the police party in the court cut off the root of the prosecution's case, the accused was acquitted on the benefit of the doubt in the circumstances.
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
online advocate from Tando Jam lawyer
