Appreciating the evidence of Section 9 (c) drug and smuggling, the raiding party recovered a large quantity of marijuana and opium, which was a testimony of the prosecution, on the indictment of the accused, had given a full account of the episode and " Sender "and the disclosure memo, as testified by the prosecution's other witness, stated that by each particular statement, the prosecutor had reasonably committed the offense beyond any reasonable doubt, neither was there any false reading and Neither the lawyer could be consulted to read the evidence, nor the lawyer for the accused. The prosecution referred to those witnesses, which created confidence. Despite lengthy scrutiny, it could not be shaken. The accused admitted that the anti-narcotic force, with no motive or illicit desire against him, could not understand why the anti-narcotic force would plan such a large amount of intoxication against the accused forensic science laboratory. In the report, the fact that the recovered material \ chars \ and \ opium \ sample ras marijuana was 1 1 1/2 kilograms, which is itself the control section 9 (c) of the Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 Used to come under And if a gram of 500 grams was taken from a packet that was 10 kilograms per packet, it also attracted the conviction that was given to the accused container that the accused was convicted on the same set of evidence, and his co-accused. He was also acquitted, to no avail, because the courts were required to investigate the chaos by grain. The trial of the rial trial court, which was beyond the board and not responsible for the disturbance, was unlawful. No illegal or irregularities can be identified in the decision
Related judgments — Quetta High Court Balochistan, 2014
