AZIZ UD DIN versus STATE
Prohibition (Enforcement Head) Order 1979 Arts 3/4 and 2 (h) Criminal Code of Conduct (v. 1898), Section 555 Prohibition of Procurement Supplies from Criminal Stores and Manufacture of Poor Drugs by the Chemical Examiner of the Drugs Act 1976 Demand action against sellers under the provisions, but not under Article 3/4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement) Order 1979 because they are not the same liquids commonly used for drug use. , Intoxicants of liquor are not appreciated as given in Article 2 (h) of the said Order, no report of the Chemical Examiner regarding any of the goods recovered has been specifically stated. There was alcohol and it was not established that the suspects were selling alcohol because the FIR alleged that the accused was prosecuted, based on the patent financial matters of the officials in which The proceedings against the accused are pending. Can be synchronized and accordingly canceled.
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
advocate for immigration from Daska lawyer
