Find a Lawyer

BALOCH KHAN versus STATE

The prosecution's definition of Articles 9 (c) and 21 of the evidence failed to prove that all the goods were recovered, intoxicating, but were able to prove that the two blades, two drugs recovered from each accused's possession. Weighed more than two kilograms of suspects, under the circumstances, the same raiding party conducted a raid under the supervision of the Assistant Director, Anti-Narcotics Force, whose name was above the sub-inspector, against the raiding party. No malicious suggestion was made and there were no violations. The prosecution of Section 21 of the Control of Narcotic Material Stances Act 1997, on the record, proved that the house on which the raid was made belongs to the accused's brother. The two accused were close to each other's cousins and nephews, so it was not possible to prosecute such a large number. The defendant-led drug defense was not understandable. The recovery of the drug from the accused's possession was completely. The accused have been charged with the recovery of two bundles of drugs, each sentenced to seven years imprisonment. Was reduced for the year and Rs 30,000 each was reduced to 25,000 rupees in which such amendments were made. The amount of punishment; the appeal against the trial court's decision was dismissed jobs for advocates from Sialkot lawyer