Pursuant to the alleged confessional statement of the accused accused of appreciating the evidence of Sections 23 (1) (c) and 23 (1) (i), the plaintiff had clearly stated that the accused never confessed to selling any drugs to the patients. As he had just described. That he opened a shop in the absence of a doctor who was the owner of the clinic's charges for selling drugs without drug licenses, mis-branded drugs and the effects of veterinary drug use on humans, ever accused in his statement An indictment could be made against the accused, who did not admit that the drug court's case was dealt with arbitrarily; the prosecutor failed to prove his case against the accused. The verdict was set aside and the accused was acquitted of the charges against him.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
