Find a Lawyer

SYED MEHMOOD SHAH versus STATE

Appreciating the evidence of Sections 9 (C) and 25 Panel Code (XLV of 1860), Sections 468 and 471, the accused was arrested on the spot while carrying a large quantity of ammunition and ammunition in a fake vehicle. Smuggling was also done. The Bogus Registration Number prosecution witnesses unanimously agreed on the time, place, weapons and ammunition retrieval and drug seizure of the vehicle operated by the accused, including samples of prohibited articles sent for chemical analysis. Chemical Examiner. Cannabis and opiates It was impossible for police officers to carry such drugs in such large quantities. It was a case of impeachment / checking and the prosecution witnesses were members of the checking party, their presence was naturally, the police personnel were competent witnesses like any other independent witnesses and their evidence could not be excluded simply because. That they had no power in the defense lawyer's debate about non-inclusion of private witnesses, as Section 25 of the Drug Substances Act 1997 dismissed the application of section 103, prosecuting the CCPC The testimony of the witnesses was confirmed by a positive chemical report. An analysis of the delay in sending the commercial samples to the laboratory, which was due to work congestion, did not result in large quantities of drugs being recovered from the car's caves in the possession of the accused defense. He was not punished or punished. The accused were retained under Sections 686868 and 1 471, PPC, the prosecutor successfully established G. The rival trial of the accused and the defense lawyer. online advocate from Killa Abdullah lawyer