Sections 6, 7 and 23 of the transfer of the case, dismissal of terrorism, application for police duty-proof duty, were filed against the accused (station house officer) who said that he had been illegally Someone was arrested in private place and detained. During the restoration proceedings, he used weapons against the raiding magistrate, whom the Anti-Terrorism Court had confessed and wanted to transfer to the court of jurisdiction. The accused were held in private premises illegally on charges of violating the law even though he was. Under the legal obligation to act strictly in accordance with the law, which first proved that he acted contrary to the law, the private person was detained in his custody and charged with malicious offense, the accused directly fired and snatched. And the legal duties of the magistrate were also severely hampered. Why the police officer convicted of committing a serious crime of terrorism should always work to help innocence in the magistrate manor custody was enough to counter the crimes committed by the accused? That the powers, jurisdiction and authority within them were never to be exploited and that they were given the sacred duty of creating a sense of security and peace. Feeling terrorists and panic among the individuals, the accused failed to present a case where the High Court's intervention was required and they failed to identify any illegality in the trial court's order. Stayed, which was otherwise legal, gambling
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2013
