AHMED SHAH versus THE STATE
Prohibition (Enforcement Head) Order 1979 Article Article 4 Criminal Procedure Code (V9 1898), Section 103 Despite prior spying information, the excise inspector raided the suspect's home and did not share two respected public witnesses in the recovery proceedings. , Thus, violated the $ 103 mandatory provisions, contradicting the CCPR material related to the color of the recovered powder and the number of portions contained in it, which were not specified by the prosecution. Presented the matter to the utmost extent. The suspect was acquitted in the circumstances
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
jobs for fresh advocates from Jhatta Bhutta lawyer
