Find a Lawyer

CHARAGH SHAH versus STATE

Section 9 (b) praised the evidence for the recovery of the drug conviction, the reduction of the sentence in the reduced circumstances of the accused, the prosecution's witnesses did not intend any previous hostility or illicit plea against the accused so that he could be falsely prosecuted. Can be added to Both of the prosecution witnesses supported each other on almost all material points and their statements were also supported by the Chemical Examiner's report, both of the defense witnesses presented by the accused provided no credible evidence and The statements of the plaintiff were naturally ordinary, and the prosecutor successfully proved his case. Unlike the defendant, he did not press for the willful plea, according to the prosecution's case, the recovered chars were in different pieces. Either all the pieces should be sent to the chemical inspector or all the recovered material should be sent to the Chemical Examiner to establish whether it was a narcotic substance and this cannot be stated exactly. The rest of the fragments are also found in Chars, taking advantage of the suspect's suspicion, changing the sentence from Section 9 (b) of the Control of Narcotic Material Stances Act 1997 to Section 9 (a) of the Act and the sentence was already given to the accused. The period was completed. law firms from Phalia lawyer