Sections 6 and 23 were summoned by the Anti-Terrorism Court to transfer to the Commonwealth Court, and the co-accused (applicants) were charged with committing theft at the complainant's home. And facing resistance, they killed the complainant's father and injured his brother. The trial court dismissed the application under Section 23 of the Anti-Terrorism Court from the Anti-Terrorism Court to the General Court, with the observation that the culprits were brutally murdered which caused fear in the minds of the people around them. Depression and insecurity were born. The FIR alleges that at midnight, three persons misbehaved at the house of the complaining party and their clear intention was to steal the accused and the accomplices, who were fired and fired in the air or on the villagers. There is no charge of , So as to frighten them or the community, there was no prior acquaintance between the accused and them. The complainant's present incident was a minor incident of wanted theft where one thing led to another and two. People were killed; no evidence was brought to meet the requirements of Section 6 (b) of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997. In the present case, the request for review was not allowed; the trial court's controversial order was set aside and the petition under Section 23 of the Anti-Terrorism Act 1997 was transferred to the trial judge's court. The permission was given with guidance. Either forward the case on their own or any additional competent to try the crime
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2012
