Find a Lawyer

AKHTAR HUSSAIN versus STATE

Section 9 (c) and 25 Testimonies Testimony Chemical Examiner's Report was Positive The prosecution's witnesses unanimously dismissed that the alleged quantity of heroin was recovered from time to time because of the full harmony in the deposition of the prosecution's witnesses. Because there was no major or material contradiction in the statements of the prosecution witnesses in relation to the great details of the events, it was said that the witnesses were subjected to lengthy and exploratory investigations, but their authenticity was defended. There was nothing to be broken, as the accused did not present any evidence in defense which showed that It seems he had nothing to do with it. Property confiscated and charged, evidence about the safety and custody of the parcels of heroin recovered from the accused, establish credibility of the report of the Chemical Examiner parcel of the heroin sample sent to the expert, the sample parcel late. The departure was a definite objection. He did not consider AC's interest to be prejudicial - proved by independent and reliable witnesses - the recovery was proved and he had fully established a litigation case and for a police officer. There was no legal restriction, nor would it be prohibited from being a complainant under the law That is, if he was a witness to the commission of the crime and also the discussion of the suspect's investigating officer in connection with non-compliance with the provisions of section 103, CCP, was suspended because two or more respects of the location were respected. The companionship was not required of the persons because under section 25 of the Narcotic Substances Act of 1997, the application of section 103, CCP, was dropped. , Where the arm us immigration advocates from Harnai lawyer