NIAMATULLAH KHAN versus THE STATE THROUGH ANTI-NARCOTICS FORCE, SINDH
Section 9 (c) Definition of drug possession and smuggling evidence The benefit of the doubt was not independent of the case of the prosecution The major contradictions were found in the gathering of the prosecution witnesses at the location of the incident, and no one about the members of the raiding party There was no explanation. It is available with the prosecution why the case property was not sealed in the presence of the special prosecutor and not in the court. In case of illegality the property cannot be safely relied upon. The marked discrimination was available on the signature of the accused. The tenant's contract and its CNIC, which had no response whatsoever, contradicted the submission of prosecution witnesses in relation to the weight of the prohibited goods, alleging that the defendants. Has been recovered from. No previous record of punishment was available against the accused. The suspect was mentioned as an international drug dealer and was arrested on the tip of the spy who told him that he was an international drug smuggler, but the prosecution Both witnesses have confessed that they have no record of any allegations involved before the current incident. Labeling the accused as an international drug dealer without evidence or evidence of any drug was unlawfully appearing by the prosecution, samples were not produced from each packet and the acquittal of the accused was also prosecuted. The source was not offered to bring the prosecution case home. Without a doubt, the prosecution had to prove beyond its reasonable doubt that whenever any suspicion was raised, the accused
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2012
