Sections 365A, 506/2, 216, 147, 148 and 149 of the Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Section 7 Criminal Procedure Code (V9 1898), Sections 249A & 265K, Abduction, Asylum and Terror Appeal for arrest proceedings The Judge Anti-Terrorism Court granted an unlawful injunction without considering the material available on the record, which includes the statement of one kidnapper and the statements of another abducted family member. The application, filed under 249A, was dismissed by the CRPC with observation. The re-investigation was not binding on the court. And the police officers recorded their statements under Section 161, CR PC, in which they involved the accused and their names appeared in the FIR if the judge, the Anti-Terrorism Court, was at that stage. If it is not possible to be bad, he should consider all the material available on the record. And it should have been debated why it was not possible to get worse at this stage, but the judge did not consider the impact and the implications of the statements made under Section 164, CR PC, in which the abductor and Their relatives did not find the suspect involved, nor could they be traced. In deciding the application under Section 249A, the CRPC failed to consider and appreciate the material on the record and decided the application in a manner that was highly contrary to sentiment and scope. Section 249A, CCPC, whether or not the charge was baseless or whether a conviction was probable, can be decided only if the trial court considered all the material available on the crime branch record report, The routine offered under section 177
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2012
