Section 9 (c) praised the evidence for drug arrest and smuggling, both the Station House Officer, the seizing officer and the prosecution witness, who were the minor witnesses to the recovery memo's prosecution witness, presented the account. Was. All material details of the incident were confirmed by each other. Such as the manner and manner of reaching the accused on the spot in the motor car. Chased by a police party. And from that time he made his presence on the spot at the time of drug recovery and arrest of the accused. And the driver of the vehicle was told that the witnesses were subjected to lengthy and investigative investigations, but that their testimony could not be broken on the material aspects of the case, with the chemical analysis report dismissing the prohibition. I, however, had the positive burden of proving that the accused were not in possession or were aware of the prohibited persons in the motorcade, but they failed to appear and explain that the suspects had spent their odd hours at night. Offered various prescriptions for travel, which did not appeal to the sensible mind about the recovery of weapons and the execution of the accused. The ammunition from Ruff reinforced the prosecution and false opportunity prosecution story, there was nothing raised by the accused, but only the attempt to cover up his own crime was a false, fabricated and later defense version of the trial court. The charge was rightly dismissed. In the case of Hugh, the prosecution had failed to attract in any case to cast doubt on his innocence in the case of the adjoining fours for the value of 3 volumes and the value, which was in the million, of the accused.
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2014
