Section 9 (c) FIR was immediately lodged with the definition of drug possession and trafficking evidence in the presence of the suspects from a motorcycle petrol tank in which they were traveling. Report analysis sent to the sample laboratory was positive All documents submitted by the prosecutor during the trial went unconstitutional by the defendants, who supported the defendant's story in defense of the defendants. That he was not going to a picnic nor was he convinced, nor was he the accused on record, under section 2342, CRPC. In his statements did not explain his presence at the scene, did not show any hostility to any type of Police with the accused, without reasonable cause can not ban a large amount of delay to the accused. Sending samples to the Chemical Examiner for analysis did not result in 23 days, since no objection was raised, it did not tamper with the ban, nor was it challenged in safe custody. The prosecution's evidence was permanent, coherent and no material contradiction. It was not a universal application rule that in all cases the case was registered by a sub-inspector. On the record in the cross examination, whereby the benefit of the accused could be increased, the accused's appeal was dismissed in the circumstances.
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2012
