Sections 561A, 154 and 173 of the Criminal Procedure (XLV of 1860), Sections 302, 148 and 149 of the Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Section 7 Constitution of Pakistan, Article 199 Constitutional Scope of Qalam, with deadly weapons. Equitable rioting, the common purpose of terrorism and the removal of the grounds of the Act FIR Double Risk Double Risk High Court jurisdiction The defendant admitted that the second FIR was registered in connection with the same case in which both The case was filed in connection with the origin of the incident in the FIRs. In the event, in the presence of the accused, the roles played by the accused during the alleged incident were different; the version contained in the existing FIR, the first FIR was not explained, explained or extended and the second FIR There was no legal restriction for registering AR grounds. There were legal jurisdictional patents on record to terminate the FIR. A clear violation of any law clause and the allegations contained in the FIR was not proven to be a crime No scope for termination of the illegal FIR was on record if the accused committed the initial trial offense. The perpetrator could not be allowed to escape the ordinary case before the competent court of jurisdiction. Resisting the constitutional jurisdiction, while terminating the FIR during the investigation against them, would be akin to deepening the investigative process that was not lawful, precluding the proceedings as such would interfere with the jurisdiction given to the Executive Organization. There may be a possibility of injustice in the summary settlement and if the matter is settled at an early stage, then there will be a law and order situation.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2015
