Find a Lawyer

ASIF ALI versus STATE

Section 9 (b) evidence of intoxicating substance was found in possession of 400 grams of marijuana in connection with the evidence of prosecution witnesses and contradictions between the FIR accused in suspicion of sending evidence to the benefit of the suspect and the trial court He was convicted under Section 9. b) The accuracy of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 states that marijuana was allegedly recovered from the guilt of the accused's trousers, but the complainant / police officer dismissed the trousers. ) Has been recovered from the right side. The suspect's arrest and recovery adviser (police officer) narrated a story in his hearing that stated in the FIR that Narcotic (marijuana) was sent to the Chemical Examiner 12 days after his alleged recovery. , And a record of the case was not provided. The prosecution failed to prove its case beyond the shadow of reasonable doubt as to who had the sample parcel in the said period. El was accepted, the suspect was taken advantage of and the accused was acquitted

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2013

• GHULAM HUSSAIN v. State 2013 YLR 228
• MUHAMMAD HANIF v. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, P.S. RAJO KHANANI, DISTRICT BADIN 2013 PLD 232
• MUHAMMAD RAMZAN KATIAR v. PAKISTAN REFINERY LTD. 2013 CLD 233
• SALAHUDDIN DHARAJ v. PROVINCE OF SINDH through Secretary, Local Government Department 2013 PLD 236
• RABB COFFEE HOUSE v. MUHAMMAD BAKHSH & SONS 2013 MLD 239
• MIRAN alias MIR MUHAMMAD v. State 2013 PCrLJ 244
• MUHAMMAD ISHAQUE QURESHI v. ZAHIR HUSSAIN JAFRI 2013 PLD 245
• SHAIKH MUHAMMAD v. State 2013 YLR 248

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2013 →

online advocate from Okara lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes