HAFIZ BILAL AHMAD versus STATION HOUSE OFFICER, POLICE STATION 18-HAZARI, TEHSIL AND DISTRICT JHANG
Section 11 EE (2) (a) and (3), Fourth Schedule to the Constitution of Pakistan, Arts 4 and 199 Constitution Protection for Good Conduct Treatment Complaints over three years were complaints that their names were included in the Fourth Schedule. And they were treated well to add a person's name to the list prepared in accordance with the Fourth Schedule to the Security Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, which was the main solid material and the appropriate reason that this person was a worker. , The official or any banned organization or any partner of an organization suspected of being involved in terrorism or sectarianism, was also required by the relevant government. The nature of the content or information to be retained should be such as is necessary to satisfy any reasonable person. Admission to the Fourth Schedule of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, and the most important requirement, was that the competent authority MU named applicants to prove the legal status of this order in accordance with the Fourth Schedule of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 Standing on the prepared list, which was a violation of the relevant government's ban for more than three years. A) Including the name of an individual in the Fourth Schedule for an indefinite period of the Anti-Terrorism Act 1997 was not only against the relevant provisions of the law, but also for citizens to enjoy the protection of the law and to deal with it. Definitely a clear violation of the truth. By law, as listed in Article 4 of the Constitution, keeping the names of applicants in a list as specified in the Fourth Schedule to the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, not in accordance with the law drawn up more than three years ago. And could not be retained
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2011
