Find a Lawyer

MST. ZUBAIDA SADRUDDIN versus STATE

Section 9 (c) Definition of Evidence Not a single witness has stated that at any stage of the investigation, the accused was asked, if he was the owner of a heroin-exporting suit, to prove to the prosecution. There was no evidence to lead. Anything or any other article was exported in the form of a document containing some interactive article to match the possession or possession of the heroin suit case to prove that the suit case. It was either owned or owned. None of the prosecution's witnesses had said a word by the accused that the defendant in the trial had raised the case or that the Porter / Prosecutor's witness had taken him out of the car on his direction and said that the witness had The accused was not charged nor heard in the examination. He identified the accused in a regular test identification parade that was not conducted, there was no nexus of the accused, which contained heroin in the suit case, and no details were given about his press. Thereafter, it will not terminate the prosecution from its duty to prove that the narcotics accused had, controlled, or possessed, an example of complete disqualification from existing investigative agencies and Due to the incompetence of, it could not be arrested that they had. The trial court set aside the conviction against the accused and the sentence against the accused was dropped, the accused was acquitted of the charge and accordingly he was released. solicitors from Nilore lawyer