The charges against the accused for defining Section 9 (c) evidence were that three packets of heroin powder and one packet of heroin were recovered in a room in the possession of the accused Elmira and the wooden boxes were not exclusive. And / or the accused is controlled, but the question was related to the use of other officers and subordinate staff of other departments who performed their official duties there - the ability to deal with the word - physical possession means The way one likes it, the ability to exclude everyone and the determination of someone to use that physical power and to dominate anything that shows that they can use it as they wish. I should be and not just the physical presence of the accused in proximity to the cause. Identifying the goods recovered as heroin powder, witnesses also said that the substance was stoned, according to evidence from the Narcotics Force personnel in the joint possession of several officers / officers of the department. That was a feature of most of the property cases found in Alamir, a case being run that was either proceeding before competent courts or is currently pending, all such facts clearly indicated. It was alleged that he was not in the exclusive use of Alamir nor in the exclusive possession of the recovered goods, which was alleged to be in his possession. The prosecution, however, proved their case against the accused. Failure to do so, sentenced by the trial court and sentenced on the charge of acquittal, one side and the accused acquitted
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
