Find a Lawyer

ZAFAR versus STATE

Recovery of Section 9 (C) Evidence 11kg Opium Complaint as Investigating Officer There was no public witness. During the search, 11kg of opium was recovered from the accused and the trial court sentenced him to life imprisonment. Kept. Taken by the High Court, the accused was that the complainant was an Investigation Officer himself and all the prosecution witnesses were officers of the Anti-Narcotic Force Validity Police Officer, under the law, there was no obligation to be a complainant, If there was a witness of the same, so can the officer. An investigating officer, unless he was charged with prejudice while the investigating officer and other prosecution witnesses were employees of the Anti-Narcotic Force, had no rivalry or rivalry against the accused for carrying such a large quantity of drugs. Was. The witness had passed a lengthy cross-examination to support the prosecution's case in establishing the prosecution's testimony, but any material extraneous contradiction in the defense prosecution's case. Failure to know, the prosecutor managed to bring the accused's crime home by retrieving his ocular account, drug and chemical substances. The attractive report allegedly failed to identify any fault of the law in the verdict and was unthinkable, and the appeal was dismissed. criminal advocate from Hunza Nagar lawyer