Find a Lawyer

RAO FAHD ALI KHAN versus STATE

Section 23 of the Criminal Code (v. 1898), sections 190 and 193 of the transfer of the case from the Anti-Terrorism Court to the court of general jurisdiction and vice versa, although Section 23 of the Anti-Terrorism Act 1997 Procedure provided. The court of general jurisdiction, but this procedure could not be passed by law, was not given to the Anti-Terrorism Court to direct this case under Sections 190 and 193 without direct session court or session additional judge. To move. The Sessions Judge did not have the power to pass or direct a case to any court (direct) established under the Anti-Terrorism Act 1997; both the courts (Anti Terrorism Court and Session Court) had FIR and final return. There was no alternative but to return. For the purpose of subsequent action by the police, the prosecution or the concerned investigating officer should present the report to a competent court of law. ction

Related judgments — Islamabad, 2014

• ROOMANA GUL KAKAR v. NATIONAL ASSEMBLY SECRETARY OF PAKISTAN 2014 PLC(CS) 929
• Haji ABDUL RAZIQ KHAN v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN 2014 CLD 975
• ABDUL SATTAR BAIG v. State 2014 PCrLJ 983
• TAUQEER SADIQ v. State 2014 PCrLJ 1019
• MUHAMMAD SALEEM v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Establishment Division, Islamabad 2014 PLC(CS) 1084
• MUHAMMAD TANVEER v. The STATE through Anees-ul-Arfeen 2014 PCrLJ 1096
• AEROTRON (PRIVATE) LIMITED v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Principal Secretary to the Prime Minister (Chief Executive) 2014 CLD 1185
• TAHIR MAHMUD v. QASIM M. NIAZI 2014 PLC(CS) 1199

All Islamabad judgments of 2014 →

immigration advocates from Nowshero Feroz lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes