Search warrants were not taken into account as per the provisions of Sections 103, CRPC, Section 9 (c), 21 and 25 Criminal Procedure Code (v. 1898), definition of evidence relating to Section 103 intoxication. No assistance was given, under section 25 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997, the application of section 103, CRPC, was barred from ignoring section 21. The Control of the Narcotic Sub-Maintenance Act, 1997, which was a directory in nature and was not mandatory, cannot throw the whole restoration process into consideration, especially since no one from the raiding party has expressed any hostility against the accused. On the contrary, statements of the testimony of a special or important prosecution witness were found contradictory, which could discredit or deny their evidence. No evidence was prevented due to the evidence of the witnesses and no false letters and evidence were read in this case. In the court below, there can be no interference, in the circumstances
Related judgments — Quetta High Court Balochistan, 2011
