Find a Lawyer

NASRULLAH ALIAS NASRULLI versus STATE

The testimony of the section 9 (b) testimony was unanimously dismissed by both prosecutors' witnesses that 503 grams of heroin was recovered from the accused, no major or material contradiction was found in the statements of the two witnesses, hardly two of their witnesses The statements in the text may have slightly changed. The testimony of the two witnesses confirming the fact that they were able to rely on the testimony that the defendants had relied on the witnesses to prove that the defendant was in possession Heroin is recovered at a date, time and place. Although the witnesses were police officers, it was not enough to discredit them in their own testimony as they had no enmity to falsely implicate him in the trial case. The evidence was believed to be truly safe and secure. The credibility was established from the parcel of the heroin sample recovered from the suspect, the report of the expert Chemical Examiner's report was that the sample sent to the chemical analyst confirmed the evidence for the evidence of the heroin C report. Given that the substance recovered from the accused was, in fact, a heroin prosecution, under the circumstances the crime was brought entirely out of the accused's home. Beyond any reasonable doubt, the trial court had, in the circumstances, found the defendant truly guilty and the amount of heroin was recovered from the accused, being heavy enough, the trial court sentenced him to only 2/2 years imprisonment. , While imprisoned for such a crime. The penalty trial court has already shown the defendant sufficient flexibility in awarding the sentence criminal advocate from Qalandarabad lawyer