Find a Lawyer

KHAN SAHIB ALIAS DOCTOR versus STATE

Section 9 (c) Appreciating the Evidence Both of the prosecution's witnesses were fully consistent with all important material details and had not waived at all. The hashish was recovered at the specified date, time and place. The defense could not prove why the police would falsely implicate the accused, especially when there was no enmity with the accused against any member of the raiding party, as the prosecution witnesses made permanent statements on material points and the accused made their statements. I was unable to identify any contradiction. The contradictions pointed out by the accused's lawyer were not enough to rob. The marijuana was found in his report by the Chemical Examiner was not malicious. Delaying the goods recovered with the delay attributed to the investigating officer could not be considered fatal as the defense could not succeed in establishing malpractice by the police. Apart from minor errors, no serious defect could be identified in the investigation which did not affect the accuracy. Neither the trial nor the prosecution's panic was enough to prove that all the material recovered was prohibited and that the failure of the investigating officer to develop a place-to-place plan made it appear as if That it is not prejudicial. The record, to a great extent, on the accused headed by the prosecution, concluded that the accused had been found guilty. The trial court had already accepted the accused's plea to reduce his sentence, which was not accepted. And the defendant's appeal against his conviction and sentence was dismissed sed \ r \ n \ r \ n list of advocates from Haveli Lakha lawyer