The Section 11 Law Reform Ordinance (XII of 1972), the Section 3 Intra Court Appeal Report of the Provincial Quality Control Board (PQCB) was upset over the action taken by the FQCB, on this basis. The IR was filed and the High Court Single Judge refused to intervene in the matter. The proceedings taken by the PQCB not only met the requirements of the law while issuing show cause notices, received the same response. And allowed the accused to have a personal hearing but to examine the documents, reports and statements and their findings presented or presented to them. Prior to reaching the C, which was based on the scope of the inquiry / investigation provided under Section 11 of the Drugs Act 1976, and the rules laid down by the board under which the FIR was directed And then the drug inspector should be allowed to sue for the responsibility. , Which can include several parties, including start-ups and many supply chains, need to be accessed by the investigating agency, who had the necessary options, skills, and resources to authorize a jurisdiction. According to the law, collect evidence for the litigation and set up a case, which will decide the question of the appellant's guilt or innocence. Based on the evidence presented to him, the other accused persons, by law, will have ample opportunity to defend their case before the trial court in accordance with the law and all the defenses that it has, if before the trial court. If taken, they would be prosecuted
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2015
