Sections 9 (c) and 36 Criminal Code of Conduct (v. 1898), Section 156 (1) Determining the Evidence of Drugs to Persons with Criminal Investigation Agency (CIA), No doubt, Section 156 (1), there was no authority under CRPC. III Investigating an identifiable offense, but in the present case an FIR was lodged at the relevant police station and the challan was also presented to the court by the HO of the police station, even if it was considered that Sub Inspector is not CIA eligible. Investigating the case, it will only be an amount of irregularity that does not affect the trial, especially if there has been no prejudice or injustice to the accused, nor has he been prosecuted. During the course of the trial, the court discussed the evidence contained in it. Section 103, CRPC drug cases cannot be controlled by drug articles. Because of this, the context is valid and based on its verdict, under the Narcotic Material Stances Act 1997, the prosecution witnesses were given the straight path. The evidence of the order and the trust, which had no rivalry or enmity against the police forcing 40 kilograms of heroin on the accused, did not assure the Control Section 36 of the Narcotic Material Stances Act 1997, sending the entire recovery site. Was not needed. For the Chemical Examiner's analysis, his sample was always treated as a sample of the Chemical Examiner as part of sending 40 grams of 40kg of heroin, therefore, it was not a question of whether the defense pleaded Funny
Related judgments — Quetta High Court Balochistan, 2012
