Section 497 Control of the Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), Sections 6, 9 (c), 14, 15, 25 and 29, to assist in the involvement of drug trafficking, and assisted crime , Denial of the prosecution's testimony, was guaranteed. Any hostility, in which the Chemical Examiner's report on recovered marijuana was found to be positive, with the defendant charged for delivering such a large quantity of nine kilograms of sauce, the substance recovered from the accused was proved to be marijuana. Was, in the circumstances, his initial obligation removed. While proving that the substance recovered from the suspect was prohibited but there was enough material on the record, which showed that the suspect was found sitting on the front seat of the vehicle, responsible for drug trafficking. It was found that the intoxicant was not recovered. From the possession of the accused, it was not true that the alleged offense, section 497, was a felony offense under the CCPC prohibition clause. Drug addicts were not linked to the status of a witness or counselor; they were not attracted to the Section 25 of the Prevention of Drugs Act 1997, applying section 103 of the CRPC to the police. The evidence of the officers was as good accused as any other public witness, in the absence of any corruption or defense request made by the accused, requires deep appreciation of the evidence, which is capable of bail-out. Was not accepted, which was under the provisions of Control Section 29 of the Narcotic Material Stances Act 1997. Speculation will be that a person found in possession of drugs has committed a crime, unless it is otherwise proven that he has
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2013
