Articles 6 (1) and 23 of the Criminal Procedure (XLV of 1860), Sections 302 and 365 of the Criminal Procedure Code (V9 1898), Articles 435, 439 and 561 of the Qtl e amd and the Abduction for Abduction Act Terrorism Minor Transfer The 6-year-old boy was abducted for ransom, taped to his mouth and placed in a jute bag to keep him quiet so that he would not be noticed by the public. I died and as a result the accused threw his body into the water channel. The Anti-Terrorism Court dismissed the defendant's plea to transfer the case to the court within public jurisdiction. Such vandalism had created a sense of fear, panic and insecurity among the people around them, the action against the accused persons was, to a certain extent, brought under the auspices of terrorism. Under Section 6 (1) of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, the trial court correctly ruled that the trial was denied in the jurisdiction of the trial court, which was refused by the trial court. Was done, he was not crooked or suffering. Due to any type of weakness and for this reason, no intervention of the High Court was required under the jurisdiction of the amendment under Sections 435 and 439, CCPC or the inherent authority under Section 561A, CRPC. , Which can and should only be used in extraordinary cases of unusual nature. In each case, the review was rejected in the circumstances
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2014
