Control of Narcotic Substance Act 1997 Section 9 (c) Criminal Procedure Code (V 1898), Definition of Section 103 Evidence The suspect was not suspected in the recovery of marijuana, Section 103 of the CCP has no There was no request otherwise it was not a requirement that the public witnesses in every case must be linked to it, which depends on the facts of each case. The policemen were good witnesses as to why they were involved with the accused. He did not hate and it did not hurt him personally. False Implications A large quantity of 30 kilograms of marijuana could not possibly be planted on the accused, therefore, the absence of an independent witness in such a recovery would not badly affect itself. The recovery was not disputed by the defense which gave its verdict. The chemical examination report provided by the accused was neither reasonable nor dependable enough to confirm that the seized material was charismatic and that any unlawful, malicious or irrational identification was identified in the invalid judgment. And the culprits were punished.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
