Section (c) definition of the accused's evidence stated that the police inspector had improperly trapped him because he was told that the inspector who suspected him to be involved in the murder of his son had no substance in the accused's request. The inspector explicitly denied the suggestion that the suspect was his chef and also stated that he did not know the accused before, unless otherwise the police inspector's son was killed in 1999. There was a case against the accused in full denial and lack of information about him in 2002. Charis's presence in the cave of the vehicle, himself The charge for the contraband, the weight of the vehicle could not be given, the defendant did not provide any explanation for the cannabis recovered from the vehicle's secret cavity, the trial was held. The allegations of transportation were unwarranted in the allegations; no need to send the entire property to the Chemical Examiner. Samples were taken from each bundle. It was necessary to mention the method of transportation in charge, nor was the accused misled in his defense nor the justice. Akami was in fact in the custody of the accused. When he was unaware that Charis was hiding in a secret cave at the pick-up floor, the suspects were driving while knowing that the hashish was kept in a secret cave, but his case was denied. Successfully proved that the accused was operating a pickup containing 342kg of hash in his secret cave, his request for a full refusal was proved to be false.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2010
