Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD RASHID versus THE STATE

ections Sections 6, 7 (a) and 23 - The Conduct Code (XLV of I860), Section 302 der Murder Terrorism Act - Components - The accused were acquitted by the Anti-Terrorism Court-approved order, the full circle of the case Refused to be transferred to the court of jurisdiction. le It was directly alleged that under the Anti-Terrorism Act 1997, the murder did not automatically become a case of terrorism murder In addition to murder, other components which constituted a section of section 6. According to the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, it needed to be satisfied on the basis of the facts and circumstances of each case - including additional components whether the act was designed to force or threaten the government or associate it with the government. Or with the necessary intention, to create a sense of fear or insecurity in a section of the public or community or a cult or a foreign government or population or an international organization or economic interest. ?The victim was a senior political party member and his murder was to spread fear in other constituencies / potential voters before re-election in the constituency. Such incidents of murder came under the purview of Section 6 Anti Terrorism Act 1997. Other components were found as well - the High Court refused to intervene, approved by the Anti-Terrorism Court - the review was dismissed in circumstances (pp. 390, 395] A&B

P L D 2017 Sindh 387 

Before Ahmed Ali M. Shaikh and Mohammed Karim Khan Agha, JJ

MUHAMMAD RASHID Master and another—Applicants 

versus

The STATE—Respondent

Criminal Revision Application No.61 of 2015. decided on 16th May, 2016.

Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997)—

—Ss. 6, 7(a) & 23—Penal Code (XLV of I860), S. 302—Murder—Act of terrorism—Ingredients—Accused were aggrieved of order passed by Anti-Terrorism Court, declining to transfer case to court of plenary jurisdiction—Plea raised hy accused persons was that ingredients of terrorism were missing in the case—Validity—Case of murder did not automatically become an act of terrorism under Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997—In addition to murder, other ingredients which fÓrm;ed a part of S.6 of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 also needed to he satisfied based on facts and circumstances of each case—Such additional ingredients included whether act was designed to coerce and intimidate or overawe government or public or a section of public or community or sect or foreign government or population or any international organization or created a sense of fear or insecurity in society along with necessary intent-«-Deceased was a senior activist of a major political party and her murder was intended to spread fear amongst other members/potential voters of that political party shortly before re-election in the constituency—Such offence of murder fell within ambit of S.6 Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 as other ingredients had also been met—High Court declined to interfere in order passed by Anti-Terrorism Court—Revision was dismissed in circumstances. (pp. 390, 395] A & B

Bashir Ahmad v. Muhammad Siddique PLD 2009 SC 11; Shahbaz Khan v. Special Judge Anti-Terrorism Court Lahore PLD 2016 SC 1 and Najam un Nisa v. Judge Special Court Constituted under Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 2003 SCMR 1323 rel.

Muhammad Lateefuddin Pasha for Appellants.

Zafar Ahmed Khan, A.P.G. for the State along with Complainant Muhammad Shoaib.

best advocate from Jehangira lawyer