Find a Lawyer

HILAM MUTEMA versus THE STATE

Eleven capsules containing 10 grams of heroin in each were excluded from the body of the accused until the CIR FIR FIR was registered, under the Control of Drugs Act 1997 (CC) evidence, but no suggestion of possession of it It was not ready then it had to increase to 35 capsules containing 18 grams of heroin. The presence of counselors by confiscating each heroin capsule is a serious mistake in the case of the prosecution. The FIR has reportedly recovered. Each capsule contained 10 grams of heroin while the resulting capsule contained 18 grams of heroin. Not every prosecutor can explain such discrepancies in the widget accused, a Kenyan citizen was in constant prison and without any legal help, so he was advised by prison inmates to plead guilty to the trial court's request. There is every possibility of this, no doubt, that Ton was accused of pleading guilty, but when someone was without Regal assistance, then the more severe responsibility was placed on the shoulders of the W. Court in all of this case. To convince the circumstances, the trial court had framed the charge in stereotypical and mechanical manner as the vacancy took place. Pro Pharma benefit was the charge alleging that he is entitled to benefit. As a matter of doubt, the prosecution's case was not free from serious suspicion, which the trial court did not put its mind to. The accused was acquitted under the circumstances. immigration advocate from Khanqah Sharif lawyer