Find a Lawyer

ROSHAN ALI versus THE STATE

Sections 13D, 14 and 14 of the Criminal Procedure Code (V9 1898), Section 6, 29 and 31 Session Judge's Trial of Suppression of Terrorist Activities in the Session Judge, 1975, Impact of Appreciation of Evidence The unlicensed Kalashnikov was convicted by a session judge under Section 13D of the West Pakistan Arms Ordinance, 1965 and sentenced to five years in prison, which led to the sessions judge's appeal against the decision of the session judge. Asked to prosecute the jurisdiction after which the cancellation of the Terrorist Activities Act, 1975, the Sessions Judge had no right to sue. Was no longer an option. There was no jurisdiction to prosecute the accused under the Schedule of Suppression of Terrorism Activities Act, 1975 and the trial was to be tried by the Special Judge under this Act but was also canceled by the West Pakistan Arms Ordinance, 1965. Ordinance XXXXX of the provisions of section 14A of 1964, revealed that cases were registered under sections 13 and 14 of the ordinance, excluding the cases heard by the magistrate of the court under section 13 of the ordinance. The cases referred to in the Articles stated that the two provisions shall be specifically excluded from the jurisdiction of the magistrate. Or was the only session court eligible for sentencing under Section 13 of the West Pakistan Arms Ordinance, 1965? Under Section 3131, in the case of the CCP Session of Session, the accused was authorized to stand trial as Kalashnikov and his ammunition was secured from it, the trial of the accused being fully proved. Later, he was properly convicted and sentenced by a trial court / session judge patent advocate from Pasroor lawyer