Section 9 (c) Code of Criminal Procedure (V9 1898), Section 423 definition of evidence of drug possession and trafficking At the time he prepared the report, the co-accused, who had been charged in this case. , Claimed to be his minor, who had prepared a school leaving certificate, but when he was absent, the High Court strongly considered the issue. The trial court's presiding officer, who, despite being brought before the court case, did not consider it legally and did not decide if the statement of the co-accused was true and correct, it would certainly be the trial court's The co-accused will be sentenced. With no jurisdiction, nor the most important issues involved in any legal impact, the review requires the transfer of criminal justice to a trial court-safeguard hearing on a remand Neither should be treated unfairly, and the truth should be found that the decision of the case in the appeal by the High Court would be prejudicial. Since the legal jurisdiction raised by him did not appear in the trial court properly, the High Court set aside the conviction and sentence given to the accused by the trial court, following the trial. The trial court remanded the verdict. Prohibited samples were obtained by a state chemical analyst and sent for chemical inspection and the age of the co-accused was determined when the commission was already charged with the crime and the rigors of imprisonment. The trial was over in three months
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2015
