Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD HANIF versus THE STATE

Witnesses under the Control of Drugs Act 1997, for the purpose of recovering the value of the evidence, the witnesses had no motive to make false accusations and made perpetual statements on material points, which were proved by other evidence available on record. The suspect was arrested at the scene. Immediate recovery of the FIR also supported the recovery of the accused and the material recovered by the Chemical Examiner was found to be opiate, the recovery of 5/2 kg opium from the suspect was beyond any doubt. The Assistant Sub Inspector Police was not capable of investigating the matter, but it could not, therefore, be dismissed as a qualification decision because the case would otherwise have been proved against the accused, the arrest of the Assistant Sub Inspector and the recovery of opium. Had not faced any prejudice. The police witnesses were also authorized witnesses who did not have any personal motive o f falsely involving the accused in the commission of the crime was found to be a result of which the accused was declared as the first offender and less than 10 kg. The drugs were recovered and the sentence of life imprisonment was limited to ten years. In the punishment of Tyne law firms from Kohat lawyer