Find a Lawyer

SHABIR AHMAD versus STATE

The testimony of Section 9 (c) and 25 Criminal Procedure Code (v. 1898), the testimony of the testimony of section 103 evidence, did not specifically state that the testimony of the four witnesses obtained from the possession of the accused without special charge was only one gram of 10 grams. The packet was extracted but he stated that 10 grams of marijuana was pulled from the property factory, in which case, 10 grams was pulled as sample from the rest of the property, which the next day was the protected marijuana property from the accused. The chemical analyst received three days. There was no allegation by the accused after the delivery that the property was tampered with during the transportation or that the rest was not a sealed packet obtained by the property chemical analyst, both advisers. In the absence of allegations of tampering with the property, the defendant had no basis in connection with the tampering with the property, he had no basis, supply of 3 103, the PCP did not apply to the facts and ci the drug. The results of the trial under Section 25 of the Control of Substances, 1997 available private witnesses were asked to act as counsel, but they Refuse to even private individuals to come forward to testify for various reasons. Given the deteriorating law and order situation in the country, the type of cases to prevent drug smugglers from fear of retaliation or retaliation is that the accused has to provide evidence to prove his false involvement. Did not inspect in its defense, the prosecution's case proved. Without any doubt, the accused's appeal against the accused, his conviction and conviction was dismissed. best advocate from Sehar Baqlas lawyer