Find a Lawyer

MIAN MUHAMMAD GHAFOOR versus STATE

Sections 302 and 34 of the Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Sections 6, 7 (a) and 8 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 abolish the order of the constitutional petition and move the case to a court of ordinary criminal jurisdiction. Had prayed for. The Special Judge of the Anti-Terrorism Court has declared that the disputed order was illegal, with no legal authority and no legal effect, the applicant also said that he was going to trial in the court of discrimination Put aside the transfer order. The wife and four children said very cruelly and that crime has spread terror and created a sense of fear and insecurity among the people. In such cases, it was a crime to approach the incident. In the applicant's home, it was sufficient to attract the provisions of Section 6 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, the timing, location and manner of the act was significant. The object of the promotion of the Anti Terrorism Act 1997 was to overcome terrorism, sectarian violations and other abominable crimes mentioned in Section 6 of the Anti-Terrorism Act 1997, and their fastest cases were within the scope of the said Act. Was to bring a crime. It is important to examine that it has been stated that the offense should be annexed under the aforesaid Act and any unlawful interference in the offenses under Sections 6, 7 and 8 or There has been no irregularity that justifies the High Court's intervention in exercising its constitutional jurisdiction. Power, was eliminated famous high court advocate from Charsada lawyer