THE STATE THROUGH REGIONAL DIRECTOR ANTI-NARCOTICS FORCE, QUETTA versus ABDUL HAMEED
Sections 497 (5) and 498 of the Control of Narcotic Substance Act (XXV of 1997), Sections 9 (c), 15 and 51 arrest before arrest of the narcotic drug, cancellation of the principal accused during questioning on the occasion. The name was disclosed, but no private person was involved when no one was reportedly involved during the disclosure, according to the prosecution case, the accused was absconding with the law and absconding, but the defendant Documents show the suspect allegedly went abroad at the time of the recovery. And on his return, upon learning of the registration of the case against him, he surrendered before the court and banned the approval of the defendant's bail on drug charges, the Drug Controls Act of Control. The government has granted bail from Section 51 51. The case, however, cannot be barred from the right to bail, so in appropriate cases, the prosecution may be charged by the agency, the first of which was bail, for the purpose of canceling the bail. , The agency / person had to disclose that either the court-approved order was inverted or was against the rules of the law, or the accused was trying to tamper with the evidence after the bail was granted, or Was afraid of repeating nor was there any such thing. , Nor did the argument that disclosures by the principal accused are not credible because the identity value of such disclosure was to be seen at trial, but could only be construed as a statement under section. 161, CR PC; which may be considered for the purpose of cancellation of bail. And mill
Related judgments — Quetta High Court Balochistan, 2015
