Find a Lawyer

RAZA DOGAR versus THE STATE

Section 365A / 392 Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Section 7 (ii) The trial court sentenced the accused under Section 365A, relying on the allegation that the PPC said the accused had abducted the kidnapper. It was reported that he had abducted her in exchange for ransom. The court did not take into account the piece of evidence under which the accused expressed his intention or future plan, which was not sufficient to prove the accused's guilt under section 365A, PPC under section 365A , PPCs can be sentenced to death. In order to record the punishment under the said section, all the components contained in it must be established if only an attempt was made to commit an offense under section A, AA, PPC, if the punishment is punished under section 5 365A. The PPC read with section 511, the restoration and the fugitive facts, as well as the PPC parcel of the kidnapping statement, suspected that the prosecution case had beyond doubt established that section 36565A, pp. Has been tried under the guise of C was made by the accused so the accused can be punished under Section 5 365A, PPC read with Section 111111, although PPC has recovered Rs. 700 700R recovered from the complainant by the accused. Could not be executed because the accused was absconding, the High Court relied on the complainant's statement, exonerated Rs. 700 and upheld the conviction and sentence of the accused under Section 395, PPC, as the trial proceeded. Has been filed under Section 365A, PPC could not be found. , Section 7 (ii), conviction of the offender under the Anti-Terrorism Act 1997 and punishment of the offenders under section 7 (ii) of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 as per the circumstances. famous high court advocate from Kalaswala lawyer