Section 9 (c), 25 and 29 The value of drug trafficking evidence being employed by the above departments cannot be dismissed by any other public witness and their statements as much as Section 25 of the Drug Control Act 1997 Had excluded the application of Section 103, CRPC in drug cases. The companionship of the private witnesses with the inquiry, therefore, was not defective in abolishing the sentence; the nature of the said Act is the provisions of Articles 20, 21 and 22 of the said Act; The sight could not be damaged. Recovery from the occupation of the accused, the technical items of any kind can be ignored. If this is the case otherwise the chemical Examiner's reports of marijuana and opium recovered from the accused were a positive indictment. Had discharged its initial charge, while the defendants failed to carry their burden under Section 29 of the Narcotic Substances Control. Act, 1997 The evidence of the prosecution was confiscated tent The decision did not face any illegal interference in circumstances r \ n
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2012
