Find a Lawyer

SOHAIL ALIAS GANG versus STATE

Section 497 (2) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), Section 6/9 (c) bail, with the grant of further investigation FIR, showed that the accused was selling chars, but not at the seller's alleged time. There was no buyer. The marijuana, because it did not appear that a buyer's statement was filed by the investigating officer, alleged in the FIR that the accused was selling chars, there was no ambiguous and inaccurate statement anywhere in the FIR, The complainant stated that he knew the suspect before the suspect was arrested about six months after the date of the alleged incident, the investigating officer was obliged to obtain the identity parade of the accused before the magistrate. The suspects were allegedly present at the time of the arrest. The parade was held, which reflected on the prosecution's case, the sample was also sent to the Chemical Examiner after considerable delay without any delay. After further litigation, the matter of further inquiry was entitled to the accused's bail, the accused was admitted to bail, under the circumstances. when you need a advocate from Bolan lawyer