Find a Lawyer

THE STATE/ANF SINDH versus MESSRS NAUSHAD ALI AND SALEEM ASSOCIATES BUILDERS

Freezing of property acquired through illegal interference in drugs in the exercise of powers under section 6 (4) (5) (6) of the Anti-Narcotics Force Act, 1997 , Which was allegedly obtained by unlawful involvement in drugs, the trial court set a deed of unlawful possession and ordered it to pass an order under section 6 (5) of the Anti Narcotics Force Act 1997 Before the property can be justified. To establish the opinion that it was reasonable suspicion that the said property was obtained through drug involvement while the opinion was required under section 6 of Section 6 of the Anti-Narcotics Force Act 1997 There should be some reasons. The communication between the material on which the suspicion was suspected and the opinion if the conditions are fulfilled, under sub-section (5) of Anti-Narcotic Section 6 (5), under the Force Act, 1997, the officer is required to establish further opinion. There was a requirement that it be said that the property was being removed, transferred or disposed of in some other way, before the property could be frozen if it was discovered that the suspect was being sought by the authority. Reasons not specified. , Then the order of freezing will become unclean. The inspector's impugned order had shown that the inspector did not give any reason for forming his opinion on the points referred to in section 6 (4) (5) of section 6 of the Anti-Drug Force Act 1997. The inspector, in cases where the trial court did not maintain that the trial court correctly set aside the frozen property was required to return to its original status when it was dated. famous supreme court advocate from Rajanpur lawyer