Find a Lawyer

SHAUKAT KHAN versus THE STATE

Control of Drugs Act 1997 Definition of Section 9 (c) Evidence Testimony of Both Prosecutors Provided Permanent Statements on Material Points Advocate for the accused has made any contradiction over material points in the statements of witnesses identified in his statements. Failed to identify. It was not enough to discredit his statements which were otherwise permanent and natural. The witness was not charged with falsely implying that the accused was arrested on the spot and 75kg of hashish and 8kg of opium was recovered. It was alleged that the driver of the vehicle from which the drugs were recovered had taken a special stand. He confessed to his presence at the place of recovery and also confessed that he was the driver of the car, which the Syed accused stated that the co-accused took the victim who had fled the house with him. And as they were leaving the car, Chars and opium were found under the seat of questioning and the carbon recovered from the gates, who was driving the car, was aware of Charis' presence and was taking the opium in the car, Under section 9 (c) it was conferred the control of the Narcotic Substances Act 1997. It was alleged that he was the driver of the vehicle and did not prove to be the owner of the recovered marijuana and opium, which had the highest carrier role and the original owner was not arrested by the police. The death sentence was limited to life imprisonment when the partner appeared, the co-op told the two women that they were traveling in the car as well, and stated that they had easily picked up the car and they immigration advocates contact from Kotla Arab Ali Khan lawyer