Sections 497, 103 and 537 of the Control of Narcotic Substance Act (XXV of 1997), Section 9 (c), 21, 22, 23 and 25 drug bail and trafficking, refusing to be the driver of the accused truck, which allegedly yielded the goods. Hui, he was in charge, and he was in control and knowledge of it and it was alleged that he was aware of the banned substances and that could be attributed to him, along with the counter narcotics force. No hostility to the accused was established under Section 25 of the Drug Control. Failure of the participation of any private witness in the recovery proceedings, after the application of the Material Stances Act 1997, Section 103, Cr Pc, Regulation 21, 22 and 23 of the prosecution case being the Directory of the Narcotic Substances Act 1997 Could not be declared fatal. In nature, its non-compliance will not fail the trial, which was merely irrelevant and treatable under section 577, the Narcotic Substances Control Act, under section 9 (c) of the CRPC. , 1997, provided that no officer below the rank of Sub Inspector of Police shall be authorized to exercise powers under this Act, but that the supply is in the directory, the pre-trial challan. Can be produced in a trial court. At this point, any observer can argue that the issue of conflict between the two sides with regard to the rule of consistency is prejudicial, the only reason being that the evidence against the accused was not equivalent to that of the co-accused, who was admitted. had gone. Bail accused could not be admitted on bail, in which case, their bail application was dismissed.
Related judgments — Quetta High Court Balochistan, 2015
