Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD RAFIQ SHAHID versus SPECIAL JUDGE, ANTI-TERRORISM COURT, FAISALABAD DIVISION, FAISALABAD

Sections 2 (x), 6, 7 and 23 of the Conduct Code (XLV of 1860), Sections 380, 436, 440, 148 and 149 of the Public Order Ordinance (XXXI of 1960), Section 16 of the Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 of the Constitution The petition was fully covered in the transfer of the case to the court of the Common Terrorism Act described in section 2 (x) of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, which complained that the protesters may have begun to protest. Didn't see the crowd for. Spraying kerosene not only damaged property at the complainant's house, but also burned it and looted valuables, which did not imply any personal revenge or personal retaliation. Part of the mob or members of the Legislative Assembly for the purpose of organizing the procession and blocking the road and compiling the other acts mentioned above were certainly designed to control the government or the public or the community. The sense of security, the complainant's sister's home and property damage act completely attracts the crime of mischief set forth in Section 6 (g) of the Anti-Terrorism Act 1997, in which case the words of terror Come in the meaning of The FIR wanted to express his anger at the unlawful assembly, probably the motive behind the incident referred to in the Anti-Terrorism Court, under which circumstances the applicant had the scope of trial and his co-accused. Inappropriate order was not exempt, the request was dismissed immigration advocates contact from Kahror Pacca lawyer