Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD SARWAR versus THE STATE

Articles 3 and 14 of the Narcotic Substances Act of 1997 (XXV of 1997), section 32 constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 203 DD drug seizure (prohibited enforcement) order, 1979 and section 32 of drug The Impact Act of 1997 was incorporated into the principle of control and similar language, introduced under section 32 of the said Act, which could be served by confiscating a vehicle in the interest of justice, the contents of which Were also perfectly compatible. The principles of natural justice were trucks a valuable asset and the same confiscation was severely punished for a person who had no direct or indirect connection to the commission of the crime and would lead to the forfeiture of justice. The truck was ordered without determining whether the applicant, who claimed to be the owner, was involved in the commission of the crime or not received NTS support, not Actos Recess In the absence of, it was not only illegal but also a violation of the fundamental rights acquired by the Constitution. There is no direct or indirect evidence from this record or even if the truck owner had in any way informed the commission of this crime not to impose an effective order to seize the truck. The matter was put on hold and the matter was forwarded to the trial court so that a proper order could be passed regarding its delivery, which determined that the truck was entitled to be seized. inheritance advocates near Pirpai lawyer