Sections 7 of the Code of Conduct (XLV of 1860), Sections 353, 324, 377, 342 and 506 Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX 1965), Section 13 Criminal Procedure Code (V9 1898), Sections 345, 417 (2A), 493 and The Second Schedule to Terrorism Act, the use of assault or criminal force to prevent a civil servant from performing his duties, committing unnecessary offenses, wrongfully imprisoning any person, criminal intimidation and possession of unlicensed weapons. The Appeal Against Bad Compromise jurisdiction was the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, a special law that the private complainant or legal heir had no right to commit the prescribed crime. But not only was the service under the second schedule of the Criminal Code of 1998 against the individuals, should be punished for their crimes. Sections 333 and 7377, PPC Compound was not Complainant Complainant was not capable of promoting crime under Section 13 of the Arms Ordinance, 1965 compromised accused did not constitute a reasonable basis for acquittal of trial court. The complainant and the minor were not given the powers to act on the trial court statements because the accused was unlawfully acquitted on the basis of a compromise on unauthorized offenses. The trial court's decision was unlawful and without legal authority and caused a misunderstanding of justice. The verdict was made aside and the remand was obtained for further adjudication of the case.
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2013
