Advantages of Section 9 (c) Drug Arrest and Transfer Evidence Suspected benefit Charsaddha and Mashra Pokhta arrested on the basis of confidential information and allegedly driving a 10 packet of marijuana accused to trial. Recovered from secret burglaries. The court convicted the offender under section 9 (c) of the Drugs Act 1997 and sentenced him to 10,000 imprisonment. The state high court also seized a fine with a fine of Rs 50,000 - a vehicle allegedly covered in drugs, reduced the sentence to 7 years imprisonment, but it is permissible to maintain the sentence. Was dispatched to the police station with the trial property when the packet containing the drug, opened at the time of cross-examination of witnesses before the arrival of the investigating officer, was found to be of different sizes, while the prosecution's case was that all the packets were the same. He was of the size and was a minor witness to the recovery memo and said during the investigation that it was not specifically mentioned. Or was the suspect present at the time of recovery. Or in this case the property was sealed by five monograms. Or the recovery memo was prepared by the police / witness at the police station who conducted the raiding operation, who admitted in his investigation that the site's plan did not mention the presence of the suspects in the vehicle. There was a difference between marijuana and marijuana. That the parcel of the case property was not sent with five seals but with three seals. The chemical inspector's report states that the marijuana was solid gray, while the packets that were opened in the courtroom contained marijuana that was brown in color.
