Find a Lawyer

AHMAD NAWAZ versus STATE

Defendant (Enforcement Head) Order 1979 Article 4 The defendant was convicted in appreciation of the evidence and was convicted of allegedly possessing large quantities of heroin, which was contained in two bags, the complainant stated. One gram of heroin powder was isolated from each bag recovered from the suspect After sampling for chemical analysis, a letter from the chemical inspector's office, which was copied on the record, shows that Samples were previously sent to the Chemical Examiner's office, they were not found on heroin powder and fresh samples were later sent to the office. Who were later. No evidence of heroin exists on the record, which shows that the second sample was also taken from the bulk powder shipped to the Chemical Examiner's office, which was allegedly recovered from the suspect, therefore, the chemical. The Examiner Number Office was created to send samples. The evidence was available to show where the heroin of these samples was obtained and whether the two bags are contoured, after obtaining permission from any court to re-open the remaining Ning's bulk powder to produce a second sample. Gaya, which was a legal requirement, failed to survive any reasonable suspicion, conviction and sentencing of the defendants listed by the prosecution trial court. He was acquitted of the crime which led to his conviction and sentencing online advocate from Fort Abbas lawyer