DR. MUHAMMAD ANWAR TANVIR versus STATION HOUSE OFFICER, POLICE STATION CITY PAKPATTAN SHARIF,
Sections 11 (5) (B), 19 (6), 22 (3) (C), 23 (1) (A), 27 (1) (A) (B) and 30 (2) (A) Punjab Drug Rules, 1988, R4 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Constitutional Petition The FIR's allegation in the FIR was that the applicant of the applicant's medical store had the right to comply with Section 11 (5) (b). Referring to the provisions, some counterfeit medicines were recovered. In addition to the 19 (6) and 22 (3) (c) of the Drugs Act 1976, clarifying the R4 of the Punjab Drug Rules 1988, it also claimed that non-compliance with the required requirements and formal procedures provided by law. In the case of these cases, a case could not be registered against those accused on the basis of the FIR Validity Drug Act 1976 as well as a special law in Punjab Drug Rules 1988 which was Had to affect legal requirements. The traditions in the relevant sections of the Drugs Act, 1976 and Rule 4 of Punjab Drug Rules 1988, were not complied with before the registration of unknown persons. FIR, the same has been deleted \ r \ n \ r \ n
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
