Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

✓ Free WhatsApp lawyer help
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.

💬 Instant WhatsApp chat ⚖ Verified lawyer directory ⏰ Replies in minutes

UMAR DRAZ versus THE STATE


Articles 23 and 27 of the Drugs Act 1976 Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3) accused of confiscating drugs from the shop of the accused, whose misuse, unregistered and without warranty, confessed to his trial before the trial court. And their statements were also recorded in the case. The court took action to convict the accused / accused and sentenced them in accordance with the law, neither the accused nor the lawyer at the hearing. The Central Appeal and the High Court appeared, after hearing the law officer, dismissed the appeal to convict and maintain the conviction. In this case, the trial court had already shown gentleness in the case, the High Court verdict was reasonable and it did not face any legal or factual weakness, there was no specific question of law. Public interest in the case involved leave applications for appeal against the High Court decision were dismissed 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
Popular cities: Lahore· Karachi· Islamabad· Rawalpindi· Multan· Faisalabad
patent advocate from Chaghi lawyer

SJP Lawyers DirectorySJP Lawyers Directory

Pakistan's leading legal-technology platform and verified lawyer directory — connecting clients, lawyers, law firms and Bar Associations across the country.

Get in Touch

© 2018–2027 SJP Legnocrats (SMC-Private) Limited. All rights reserved.
Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes
👋 Need a lawyer? Chat with us free on WhatsApp now.