Find a Lawyer

THE STATE THROUGH DIRECTOR-GENERAL ANTI-NARCOTICS FORCE, RAWALPINDI versus SULTAN SHAH

Section 497 (5) Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), Section 9 Constitution of Pakistan, Article 185 (3) Guarantee of intoxicants, cancellation of the notice issued to the accused was not guaranteed as well. ? And they were disproportionately returned with the report that the address given by the accused was not available. The accused had jumped his bail and avoided the court and law process and appealed the petition for leave in the appeal. I was changed and was not allowed to order the accused to bail

Related judgments — Supreme Court, 2011

• SUO MOTU CASE NO. 18 OF 2010 v. Violation of Public Procurement Rules, 2004 2011 PLD 821
• AZMAT alias LAMBRU v. State 2011 SCMR 824
• SECRETARY (SCHOOLS), GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT v. YASMEEN BANO 2011 PLC(CS) 825
• ABDUL RASHEED v. State 2011 SCMR 828
• ABDUL HAYEE v. State 2011 SCMR 830
• PROVINCE OF SINDH v. SAEED-UR-REHMAN 2011 SCMR 833
• Maulana ABDUL HAQ BALOCH v. GOVERNMENT OF BALOCHISTAN through Secretary Industries and Mineral Development 2011 PLD 835
• Dr. AZEEMUR REHMAN v. GOVERNMENT OF SINDH 2011 SCMR 835

All Supreme Court judgments of 2011 →

law firms from Chohar Jamali lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes