Section 27 Criminal Code of Conduct (v. 1898), Articles 249A, 265K and 561 Appeal for Cancellation of Anti-Terrorism Court Order Defective Defendant Receives Alternative Treatment Treatment Hearing (Anti-Terrorism Court) Issuing notice to police, under Section 27 of the Anti-Terrorism Act 1997, the officer (applicant), while highlighting some flaws in investigating a case, submitted his reply to the notice, which shows. That the trial court directed the accused to present his bail. The bonds and the matter were postponed for the formation of the charge and the submission of bail bonds. The accused filed the present petition against the trial court's order, arguing that the trial court should initiate the present proceedings against the accused The authority was not granted, and that the matter was investigated in accordance with law and there was no impairment in the same justification under Section 27 of the NTT. Under the Mistake Act, 1997, the Anti-Terrorism Court obtained the power to punish the offending officer when it reached a verdict, either during the trial or at the end of it, that the investigating officer conduct an investigation. I failed to properly or promptly or failed to properly follow in case of breach of duty / commission / commission mentioned in the notice issued to the accused, this seems inherently factual. The evidence for which was to be recorded and charged. In response to this allegation, the defendant had the alternate form of Sections 249A and 265K on his freedom to present his evidence, being a CCP accused investigating officer.
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2012
