THE STATE THROUGH ADVOCATE-GENERAL, N.-W.F.P., PESHAWAR versus GULLA
Samples were sent to the Laboratory for admission of evidence of intoxication arrest under Section 9 Prohibition (Enforcement) Order (4 of 1979), Arts 3/4 Criminal Procedure Code (V9 1898), Section 417 (2A). Chemical analysis Twenty days with unclear delay of the day. Due to such undisclosed delays, the alleged recovery process was suspected in connection with the identification of the accused, there was contradiction in the statements of the prosecution witnesses, both the recovery witnesses were police officers and on the spot no Not associated with recovery and search. Although Section 25 of the Drug Substances Act 1997 eliminated Section 103, the CR PC, but when available at the time of arrest and recovery, caution and caution had to be exercised for the companionship of private witnesses when the lady accused was arrested by the coach. Where he was with other passengers, but the Investigation Officer failed to associate with any such passenger or bus driver or conductor, the appeal against the eviction was dismissed in the circumstances.
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2011
