Find a Lawyer

ALI AKBAR versus STATE

Section 497 (2) Control of the Narcotic Substance Steel Act (XXV of 1997), Seizure of Section 9 Drugs, etc., approval of further investigations, these are the provisions of section 9 C) was a borderline case where maximum punishment could not be imposed. The prosecutor did not collect independent evidence to link the suspects to the crime sciences laboratory. The report was still awaited, which led to the trial of the accused under sub-section (2) of section 497;

Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2010

• Mst. IQBAL BIBI v. Mst. MARYAM BIBI 2010 PLD 105
• ORIX LEASING PAKISTAN LTD. through Branch Manager v. State 2010 PCrLJ 105
• MUHAMMAD GHAFFAR v. Mst. IRUM 2010 CLC 106
• AFZAL MOTORS PRIVATE LIMITED v. HIGHER EDUCATION ARCHIVES AND LIBRARIES DEPARTMENT 2010 PLD 110
• RAFI-ULLAH v. Mst. SOBIA 2010 MLD 155
• ABDUR RASHEED v. State 2010 MLD 180
• KAMRAN SHAH v. State 2010 YLR 216
• CHERAT CEMENT COMPANY LIMITED v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Industries and Production, Ministry of Industries and Prod 2010 CLD 226

All Peshawar High Court NWFP judgments of 2010 →

famous supreme court advocate from Hyderabad lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes