Law: Anti Terrorism Act, 1997

Section: 7,11F(5)(6),11J,11N,11V,21,21C

Law: Prevention of Electronic Crimes Ordinance, 2008

Section: 11,17,19

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 265K,164,540A,512,173,164,87,161,540A(2) ,88

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 302,34,109

(a) Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997)--- ----Ss. 7/11-F(5)(6)/11-J/11-N/11-V/21/21-C---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302/34/109---Prevention of Electronic Crimes Ordinance (IV of 2008), Ss.11/17/19---Passports Act (XX of 1974), S.6---Foreigners Act (XXXI of 1946), S.14---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss.164, 540-A & 512---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art.43---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199---Terrorism, Qatl-e-amd, abetment offence relating to passport---Constitutional petition---Quashing of order---Principal accused was reportedly arrested in India as a result of terrorist attack and on the basis of his statement recorded there under S.164, Cr.P.C. before a Magistrate, present accused and his co-accused had been arrested in the case after an inquiry conducted in Pakistan---In none of three successive interim challans submitted by the prosecution in the Trial Court the principal accused was shown as an accused person or as an absconder---Application moved by the present accused under S.265-K, Cr.P.C. for acquittal had been dismissed by the Trial Court by impugned order---Validity---Confessional statement of an accused could be used against his co-accused in the same case, but until and unless a person was shown as accused therein, his statement could not be used against his co-accused, which was the pre-condition under Art.43 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984---Contention that principal accused was not shown as an accused in S.173, Cr.P.C. report and by mere mentioning his name in the F.I.R., and on the basis of his alleged confessional statement before a Magistrate in India, he could not be given a status of co-accused of the present accused seemed to be technically sound---Trial Court while applying S.540-A(2), Cr.P.C. had exempted the appearance of principal accused and his co-accused and separated their case from the case of present accused and proceeded further by framing the charge---Principal accused had been taken by Trial Court as an accused in the case---Absconder or a person who never appeared before the court to face trial, his case was not covered under S.540-A(2), Cr.P.C.---Without having enforced the attendance of accused under…

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