Sections 324, 452, 148, 149, 337 L (2) and 337 H (1) of the Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), after preparation for the wounding of Section 7 (h), home-made misdemeanor, deadly weapons of deadly weapons. Allegedly, the assembly suffered injury, hurried or negligent, taking advantage of the evidence of terrorist acts The suspicion of police officers attacking a lawyer's rally by police officers was an indictment against the accused. On the alleged order of the District Police (DPO), he fired a volley of plastic bottles / syringes at the lawyers rally, which injured several lawyers, leaving policemen dead. Sentenced under Sections 324, 452, 148, 149 and 337L (2), police officials in the PPC and Section 7 (h) of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, said that plastic bottles were never used. No syringes were sprinkled on the flammable liquid solvents, and they were forced to stop the solicitors from holding the rally. Claiming to do so by his superior officer, as he was serious, means that the presence of police officers (in the court premises) did not mean that the accuracy of the DPO did not constitute an illegal assembly or that They assembled for riots in the absence of plastic bottles and syringes. Sections 324 and 337L (2), PPCs, would be difficult to establish in provocative material, especially since the prosecutor / complainant stated that he was in his possession, but police officers were also in the court premises. Didn't do that. PPC prosecution constituted domestic abuse under section 452; police officers themselves were stationed outside the court premises.
