Find a Lawyer

GUL BADSHAH versus STATE

Assessment of evidence for the transport of narcotic drugs, heavy drug paraphernalia was recovered from the brick-filled truck's itch by the accused, a joint search of the two courts below indicting the accused Was confirmed. , Due to the fact that this illegal substance was hidden in the cave of the vehicle and it was suggested that the accused could not be informed in this regard, which could be considered a mitigating case in his favor, and consequently I was convicted of the crime. Section 382B was restricted from death to imprisonment, without the benefit of a CR PC

Related judgments — Supreme Court, 2011

• MUHAMMAD ISHAQUE v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN 2011 PLC(CS) 977
• CENTRAL BOARD OF REVENUE (now F.B.R.) v. RECKITT BENCKISER PAKISTAN LTD. 2011 SCMR 977
• THE STATE through Collector of Customs v. BASHIR KHAN 2011 SCMR 982
• Mian AURANGZEB v. GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Interio 2011 PLC(CS) 982
• Mst. ZULAIKHAN BIBI v. Mst. ROSHAN JAN 2011 SCMR 986
• LIAQAT ALI v. GOVERNMENT OF N.-W.F.P. through Secretary Health, Peshawar 2011 PLC(CS) 990
• GHULAM RASOOL v. SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE 2011 SCMR 994
• QASIM WASTI v. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, BOARD OF REVENUE, LAHORE 2011 PLC(CS) 997

All Supreme Court judgments of 2011 →

best law firm from Kotli lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes