Section 497 (2) Narcotic Substance Control (XXV of 1997), Sections 9 and 25 intoxication bail, only one kilogram of marijuana was recovered in the form of alleged detectives, but not fragments from further investigation grant suspects. Neither the number nor the weight of each fragment was given, nor is it stated that ten grams of cannabis was isolated for chemical analysis; the accused cannot be held responsible for joint rehabilitation. As the prosecutor requested that on his notice 12 more KGS marijuana was recovered from the home of the co-accused, the prosecution case was not that the accused was a relative of the co-accused and did not mention it in the FIR. About which the suspect was found. The presence of the charisma is most likely to be done in the house of the accused, from whom a quantity of KG was allegedly recovered from it and that is under Section 9 (b) of the Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 That had not fallen. Under the Prohibited Clause of Section 497, the CCP sample was not taken from every piece of grass and under ten grams of marijuana came under the control section 9 (a) of the Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, with a two-year sentence. Was heard. Further investigation was extended to the accused on bail, under the circumstances
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2010
