Find a Lawyer

DAULAT KHAN versus STATE

Under Section 14 Criminal Code (v. 1898), the driver and the undercover truck cleaner were prohibited under section 439 lawsuit under the Prohibition (Enforcement Head) Order 1979, and Art 3 and 4 under Art. Was given. The trial court had confiscated the question under Article 14, Prohibition (Enforcement of Head) Order, 1979, which was the owner of the applicant truck and obtained the title of the said truck, stating that it had nothing to do with the commission. Nor was the alliance. In order to confiscate an allegedly used vehicle in a crime, the owner of the vehicle must be shown, in some way, to be related to the commission of the crime, if in such cases the owners of the vehicle are also guilty Did not know was seized. Activities by their servants or drivers, then, would be not only unfair, but could be prejudice to the entire community in the transport business, in the absence of any men, to impose arsenal. Would be unfair and contrary to the principles laid down in Islamic jurisprudence, it was necessary to keep in mind the intention of the doer for everything that stated that there was no criminal ancient and that he had lived his entire life, in any way. Was not involved in the activity of. Or the state's lawyer on drug trafficking, pleading that the defendant was unable to contradict or deny the prosecution when he was asked if there was any question or inquiry by the raiding party or the investigating officer Determine if the applicant / owner of the truck in question has any knowledge of transportation? Drugs, court registration advocate from Naukundi lawyer