Find a Lawyer

AJAB ALIA RAJAB versus THE STATE

Sections 365A, 392 and 342 of the Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Section 7B of the West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), Section 13 of the Martyrdom of the Law (10 of 1984), Arts 21 and 40 of the General Clause Act (1897) X), testimony of the Section 26 evidence, including the kidnappers, was supported by the prosecution's version, which had no enmity or motive for making false accusations of the accused in the case. Confident IK witnesses identified as suspected kidnappers and jeeps were identified in the test before the magistrate kidnapped and jeeps. In their knowledge, one of the accused, who recovered exclusively from the spot on the spot, had committed a criminal confession. He was also charged with kidnapping along with robbery while the accused was arrested from the telephone booth demanding payment of ransom from the family. The detention of the police from the kidnappers was further supported by the disclosure of the prosecution's story, which could result in their recovery from misconduct toward the conduct of which the law, which is martyrdom, article 21 of 1984. , And the evidence admitted that there was no evidence of delay in recording the defendant's confessional statement, which was made voluntarily and was endorsed. On the material points by other evidence available on the record prosecution, therefore, he had set his case against the accused under section 392 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, without any suspicion, PPC and section 7B, No doubt, attempts were made together, but under Section 262 of the General Clause Act, only one conviction could be punished for the accused, resulting in the PPC's Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997. For the sake of patent advocate from Gujranwala lawyer