Section 497 (2) Prohibited (Enforcement) Order (4 of 1979), Arts 3/4 Guarantee, Grant of Further Inquiry Although designated with the specific role of fermenting liquor in the FIR, the court must see Whether or not the accused was liable to prosecute under the provisions of the law under which he was liable to prosecute, one aspect of the case was found to be completely incomprehensible, unreasonable and untrustworthy. Police raided the suspect in the hands of the raiding party while he was selling liquor in his backyard. The house, especially when it was accessible to everyone, was not possible for anyone to commit any crime in an open space where it was being seen in public by the police raiding party, There was no doubt that essential utensils were recovered that were used to ferment the wine, but they could not export any material from which the fermented liquor was made, Article 1979 of the Prohibition (Enforcement) Order. In order to compel an offense under 3, it was most important that the recovery of the used materials and utensils was to be effected, but the present case. In this case, the police raiding party was unable to retrieve the material used in the manufacture of alcohol, in the circumstances which were not established, offense under the Prohibition (Enforcement of Head) Order, 1979, Article 4 of the Order. I was not attracted, guaranteed the accused was previously a non-record holder, in which case the possibility of the accused being found fake could not be excluded. He was able to sue, in which case he was not attracted to her
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2009
