Find a Lawyer

ASHFAQ AHMAD versus STATE

Section 497 (2) Control of Narcotic Substances (XXV of 1997), Section 9 bail, grant to the defendant further investigation, which was given a lift in the car that allegedly smuggled some prohibited chars. No presence was detected. When he was driving a car after seeing the police party's accomplice, he first tried to get in the car, but with no chance of his escape, the car parked on the road and escaped. Was kept in full view, which was, by nature, an excuse for the accused to flee. The suspect had to be consciously aware of the pending prohibition, even if he had submitted a further investigation, the prosecutor said. Yet it did not prove that the accused was linked in any way. At the time of trial with the accompanying accused, it was necessary to be directly aware of the prosecution by the prosecution; the direct link with the accompanying offender, as well as with the accused, had to be established; Was admitted. To guarantee, in the circumstances, \ r \ n famous supreme court advocate from Haroonabad lawyer