Section 9 (c) mentions any specimen suspected of intoxicating substances, but in recording only the seal of recovery drug addicts, it is mentioned that the samples were taken by chance, Such fact was not written in the body of the counselor, but on the last line of a margin, a separate handwriting in confession and at a different time the complainant (policeman) stated in his evidence that the recovered heroin clothing bags. I was present, however, in the FIR or in the Advisory First Investigation Officer, no clothing bags were reported, which were allegedly given. The detained heroin and samples did not appear as a witness in the custody of the other investigating officer, admitting that he had neither seen the samples nor sent them. Were sent to, but the Chemical Examiner's report revealed that they received questions about the specimens in 1999, which were not explained to them by the prosecution as to who they were. When they were taken; when they were sealed. Who sent them to the lab and where they allegedly resided during the day of rehabilitation, and they were allowed to recover through chemical exclusion appeals and acquitted the suspects with the benefit of the doubt.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2013
