Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 302(b),324,353,404,436,427,148,149

Law: Anti Terrorism Act, 1997

Section: 7

Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 302(b), 324, 353, 404, 440, 436, 427, 148 149---Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty, dishonest misappropriation of property possessed by deceased person at the time of his death, mischief committed after preparation made for causing death or hurt, mischief by fire or explosive substance with intent to destroy a house, mischief causing damage to the amount of fifty rupees, rioting armed with deadly weapon, unlawful assembly, act of terrorism---Appreciation of evidence---Application for not allowing the prosecution to examine the witnesses given up in the earlier rounds of trial was dismissed---Effect---Accused/applicants were charged that they along with fifty others attacked on a police check post which led to the death and injury of a number of Police Officers and some of the attackers---Prosecution gave up many witnesses---Under Art. 10-A of the Constitution, the accused were entitled to both a fair and expeditious trial and the onus always laid on the prosecution to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt without being given opportunities to fill in lacunas in its case which would benefit the prosecution and prejudice the accused---Trials could not be never ending where an accused, who under the law was innocent until proven guilty, remained unnecessarily in jail pending conclusion of their trial---Record showed that the charge had been framed and reframed at least on four separate occasions and on at least two occasions all the prosecution and defence evidence had been led and the trial was ripe for rendering ---Said fact potentially gave the prosecution an advantage to their witnesses as when on each occasion the trial started from scratch they had the opportunity to improve their evidence and be ready to counter the cross-examination of the defence which they had heard on numerous occasions which prejudiced the defence---In the present case, re-starting the trial from scratch on four separate occasions the applicants had to undergo years on end in custody despite having the right of an…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492