Sections 9 (c) and 36 Rules of Drugs (Government Analysts), 2001, 5 and 6 Proof of recovery of intoxicating goods From the 48 packets of charging page full charge of your vehicle that references relevant protocols and tests. Not only was it sufficiently emptied but it was scored from top to bottom, thus failure to comply. The lawsuit and its failure to respond to the provisions of section 36 of the Anti-Drug Substances Act, 1997, against the reliability of the report prepared by the prosecution, required a government analyst that A sample of the recovered substance was sent for examination so that the person could submit. If the report prepared by the Government Analyst is not prepared, sample the report signed in the fourth form by default, then it cannot be pointed out that Section 36 of the Narcotic Materials Act 1997 In the context of the report, so that the accused person could be considered as the ultimate evidence of drug addiction, the investigating officer appeared before the trial. Went to the Office of the Chemical Examiner Prosecution for any police officer Negro's safe custody was not presented to the trial court. It has been able to prove that after the alleged recovery of such recovered substances, they were either kept in safe custody or dealt with the recovered substances. They were transferred to the Chemical Examiner's office without any tampering.
