Law: Anti Terrorism Act, 1997

Section: 6(2)(d),6(2)(ee),7(b)(ff),17,23,25

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 507

Law: Telegraphs Act, 1885

Section: 25-D

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 199

(a) Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997)--- ---Ss. 6(2)(d), 6(2)(ee), 7(b)(ff), 17, 23 & 25---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.507---Telegraph Act (XIII of 1885), S.25-D---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199---Constitutional petition---Trial by Anti-Terrorism Court---Scope---Act of terrorism likely to cause death or endanger a person’s life, act of terrorism that involves use of explosives by any devise including bomb blast, criminal intimidation by anonymous communication---Accused contended that Anti-Terrorism Court was not competent to convict him of non-scheduled offence as provisions of S.17 of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 were not attracted in his case---Validity---Offences under S.6(2)(d) and S.6(2)(ee) of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 were not proved against the accused---Only offence proved against accused was that of criminal intimidation under S.507, P.P.C. which was not a scheduled offence---Anti-Terrorism Court was empowered to try a non-scheduled offence only along with/in addition to scheduled offence(s) at the same trial under S.17 of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 which did not empower an Anti-Terrorism Court to try non-scheduled offence when said court was not trying a scheduled offence---Under S.23 of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 Anti-Terrorism Court was bound to transfer the case of non-scheduled offence to any court having jurisdiction to try such offence---Once Anti-Terrorism Court had formed the opinion that the only offence proved against the accused was criminal intimidation under S.507, P.P.C., the court should not have proceeded to convict the accused of the offence as S.23 of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 did not confer jurisdiction on said court to pass judgment on non-scheduled offence---Mere commencement of trial was not a ground to decline transfer of case under S.23 of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997---Impugned judgment being. without jurisdiction and nullity in the eyes of law, could not be maintained---Constitutional petition was, therefore, converted into special Anti-Terrorism-appeal--No limitation would run against the judgment of Anti-Terrorism Court on the ground that such judgment was passed without jurisdiction---Appeal was allowed; impugned judgment was…

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