ISLAMABAD
\nSupreme Court (SC) while acquitting one Zahid Anwar accused in drugs recovery case has maintained in its decision that no one can be judge in one\u2019s own case.
\nPolice men can be witness in regard to themselves but the risk of injustice enhances without independent evidence. It is requirement of justice that plaintiff and investigator should be separate.
\nIt was further said in the decision that police claimed for recovery of 1280 grams charas from accused Zahjd Nawaz on December 14, 2022. Both plaintiff and investigation officer was one person inspector Muhammad Naeem Zia. The justice should be seen to have been done. If plaintiff investigates by himself then transparency is affected.
\nAccording to accused Zahid Nawaz former police inspector used to take meal free of cost and borrowed money from his hotel.
\nAccording to accused Zahid Nawaz when police inspector was asked to return money then he registered false case in enmity.
\nThe accused Zahid had declared the investigation biased from the very beginning.
\nA 6-page written order of Justice Muhammad Hashim Khan Kakar has been issued.
\nA 3-member bench of SC presided over by Justice Hashim Khan Kakar had heard the case.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
ISLAMABAD Supreme Court (SC) while acquitting one Zahid Anwar accused in drugs recovery case has maintained in its decision that no one can be judge in one\u2019s own case. Police men can be witness in regard to themselves but the risk of injustice enhances without independent evidence. It is requirement of justice that plaintiff and […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":453673,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-498928","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-top-news"},"yoast_head":"\n