Find a Lawyer

STATE versus SYED SHAFIQ-UR-REHMAN

Section 497 (5) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), Section 9 (c) cancellation of bail, denying the results reached by the trial court on record for linking the accused to the factual and logical reasons. No direct evidence was available. Telephone conversations between the accused were charged with the crime commission saying that they had been convicted but the bank did not release any documents to prove that the accused himself was a fake name. The account number was opened by the source. Or that he is operating the account by way of prosecution with his own signatures until the accused has established a relationship with the house from which the drugs were recovered by the raiding party, which was stated before the magistrate under section 164. Was granted, the CRPC was inadmissible under oath, under the law and was not voluntarily employed by it. The IDing party was remote and, although two members of the raiding party saw him sitting in the car, no identification parade was held to identify him, the trial court's order in connection with the trial. I cannot identify any illegal or infirm type. Excluded accordingly for cancellation of bail \ r \ n \ r \ n ask a advocate free from Jalal Pur Jatan lawyer