Sections 6, 7 and 28 of the Criminal Procedure (XLV of 1860), Sections 302 (b) / 34 and 324 of the Contempt of the Criminal Court of the Commonwealth's Anti-Terrorism Court Transfer to court The request for a transfer from the Sessions Judge's files to the Special Anti-Terrorism Special Court Court was requested, as the accused are absconding. The crime was committed on the main road. The incident sparked intense panic in the area and the crime was a case of terrorism and it came under the purview of the Anti-Terrorism Act 1997, which was alleged to have been committed by the accused. The aim was to kill the victims. An FIR was committed because of enmity between the two sides on the Act Highway by firing with Kalashnikov because according to the contents of the FIR, though the dispersal of lives has been frustrating and inconvenient, No offense will be proved under the Act. Terrorism was to be established and established, this alleged act usually created a feeling of insecurity. Or to a particular section of society. Or because of this, there was a sense of danger or fear, even though a person lost his life and suffered serious injuries, but under Section 6 of the Anti-Terrorism Act 1997, the necessary components were required to commit the crime. , Which was a threat. Either the government, or the public, was either missing, the request to transfer the case was rejected.
Related judgments — Quetta High Court Balochistan, 2011
