MUHAMMAD DIN versus THE STATE
Sections 23 (1) (a) (v) (f) (i) and 27 (4) of the Drugs Act 1976 (V9 1898), sections 243, 265 (e), 537 and 412 chairman and two members charged. Drug court was present while recording the offense of confinement and confession of the accused, not signing the decision by the other member, however, the confession of the accused was not declared illegal which is most understandable under Section 373737. Was. There was no prejudice as the decision was not signed by the CR PC Medicine Member and the charges were disclosed, clearly worded and recorded in their own words, Section 243, CR PC Or section 265 (e), CRPC not infringed by the trial court alleging that he confessed to the crime. Under this, the appeal and challenge of section 412, CRPC, were challenged. What they did not do was dismiss the charge of appeal
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
top civil advocates from Fort Abbas lawyer
