Investigation of Section 9 (c) Evidence Investigation Officer attempted to reach the main culprit for the control of drug paraphernalia, even though the owner of the case was aware of the property and transportation through the partner's truck. Did not , He had to first detect and prevent the spread of intoxicating drugs by source detection, which was disturbing the peace of society and to show the level of performance of a crime detection person. Police were eligible under the law. Investigate them to present accurate and accurate facts to the knowledge, even after submitting the invoice for the appropriate decision in this case, with only three packets out of 100 packets of marijuana recovered from the truck sample. The substance that was taken was sent to the Chemical Examiner. The defendant in this case is different from the defendant who alleged that he only took the elevator from the truck's driver who was released by the Prosecution Prosecutor and was falsely involved in the case, completely Could not be taken into account. In spite of his recovery in a public place, he was himself a question mark on the non-participation of a free man, in which case the prosecutor failed to give evidence that the case against the accused who spent five years in prison and was detained. The period would be termed illegal imprisonment, which could not be reversed, the accused was acquitted under circumstances.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2009
