Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD AKRAM versus STATE

Section 497 Control of the Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), Sections 9 (c), 29 and 51 (1) bail, denied possession of heroin weighing ten kilograms, allegedly obtained from the possession of each accused in the co-accused, Already the bail has been granted, different from the present accused, whose case was of complete denial under Section 29 of the Control of Narcotic Material Stances Act 1997, there is no doubt that the crime was committed, but the accused has made the same difference. That has to be indicated. The statements of the prosecution, the witnesses could not be considered in detail because the testimony at the bail phase did not require deep testimony; sufficient evidence was available to link the accused to the commission of the crime. Can be given. Section 497 (1), found in Article 51 (1) of the CRPC Regulation for the Narcotic Sub-Metals Act 1997, has proved to be a death sentence for this offense. And even his case was not conducive to the granting of bail. There were reasonable arguments to suppose that the accused was guilty and fully attracted the said bar of section 51 (1) of the said Act. I was denied bail to the culprit. immigration advocate from Phagwar lawyer