MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN versus THE STATE
The testimony of Section 9 (c) evidence was attributed to the recovery of a large quantity of narcotics from the accused on the record by the five witnesses who had no animosity or hostility against them, due to the passage of time there was a slight contradiction in the evidence of the prosecution. ? Neither recovery was suspected, the drugs confirmed by the Chemical Examiner as charisma and heroin state workers, who supported the prosecution case, were as reliable and reliable as the private witnesses because There was no interest in proving false extermination and crime against him. The basis of their statements can be legally accepted. The defense request made by the accused was not substantiated by any evidence on record and he alone cannot deny the prosecution's testimony.
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
advocate from Daulat Pur lawyer
