Sections 7 and 23 Criminal Code of Conduct (V9 1898), Section 526/561 A Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Section 324/353/147/148/149 Prohibition of Public Employees, Fine, Attack or Criminal Force Attempts to commit an act of rioting, a joint purpose and a request for transfer of a terrorist case have frightened the accused employees to refrain from performing their legal duties, including the police. Serious violations were also made against members of the Force Challan, in which case, it was right. In the Anti-Terrorism Court, a case was submitted for the FIR which shows that the accused had attacked the police party first and in response, the police party proceeded through the accused / applicant's lawyer. Started firing on self-defense, with no rational and justified action in which a public employee was involved in forcibly pushing or threatening to force him to leave. Or to refrain from performing his legal duties or committing serious violations against a member of the police force, armed forces, civilian armed forces, or a civil servant, was a terrorist under Section 6 (1) of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 Was praised under The trial, the alleged encounter took place with these robbers, and if the right to self-defense was accepted in these particular circumstances, it allowed the robbers or the hardened criminals to issue a controversial license to kill, compel or intimidate police forces and civil servants. Is equivalent to So that they refrain from performing their legal duties which were against the right to self-defense and passion. Or as contemplated under the provisions of the PPC
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2012
