Find a Lawyer

KHAN GUL versus THE STATE

The testimony of Section 9 (c) evidence was recovered from the vehicle's conductor, which allegedly contained marijuana, although it was an independent witness, but did not support its prosecution's evidence. Has said that the recovery of hashish had no effect. Although the witness was declared contemptuous of the above box, his statement did not benefit both the prosecution and the defense. If the statement of the witness was extracted according to the record of any other evidence, it would be clear from the box. Recovery has had an impact. Although there was a prohibited charge in the vehicle charged by the prosecution, there were some contradictions in the statements of the prosecution witnesses, but if the evidence was taken in conclusions, it could be concluded that the trial court found the accused Convicted under which he was charged. And he was rightly punished top advocates from Chitral lawyer