1998 PLP 888 (MLD)
NOOR MUHAMMAD — Petitioner Versus SPECIAL JUDGE, ANTI TERRORISM COURT, BAHAWALPUR and 2 others — Respondents
| Citation | 1998 PLP 888 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | NOOR MUHAMMAD — Petitioner Versus SPECIAL JUDGE, ANTI TERRORISM COURT, BAHAWALPUR and 2 others — Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1998 PLP 888 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1998 PLP 888 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1998 PLP 888 (MLD) (NOOR MUHAMMAD — Petitioner Versus SPECIAL JUDGE, ANTI TERRORISM COURT, BAHAWALPUR and 2 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Muhammad Farrukh Mehmood for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 526
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302/148/149
Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), S. 13 & Sched.
Murder of member of Armed Forces
Accused had sought transfer of case pending in Court of Special Judge constituted under Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 to ordinary Court of competent jurisdiction on ground that in view of amendment made in Schedule of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 Court of Special Judge had ceased to have jurisdiction in the matter
Accused had further contended that as offence had allegedly been committed prior to enforcement of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, Special Court had no jurisdiction in the matter
Contentions of accused were repelled being highly misconceived because amended provision had shown that under Entry No. 2(a)(ii) in Schedule, case of an alleged murder of a member of Armed, Forces was exclusively triable by a Special Court
Deceased being employee of Pakistan Air Force, case would be tried by Special Court and not by ordinary Court of competent jurisdiction
High Court declined to transfer case from Court of Special Judge to ordinary Court of competent jurisdiction.
Judgment & Decree
3. The challan of the case is pending in the Court of Special Judge constituted under the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997. The petitioner sought its transfer to the ordinary Court of competent jurisdiction on the ground that in view of the amendment made in the schedule of the said Act vide notification dated 13-12-1997, the said Court ceased to have jurisdiction in the matter. The amendment in the schedule is reproduced as under:-- "
2. Any offence punishable under any of the following sections of the Pakistan Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860), namely:- Section 302-- (i) if committed with a cannon, grenade, bomb or rocket or (ii) if the victim is a member of police, armed forces or civil armed forces or is a public servant; or (iii) if committed during, or while committing the offence of robbery or dacoity and committed after the commencement of this Act; or
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that under the substituted entry No. 2(a)(iii) only the offence committed after the commencement of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 could be tried by the Courts established under section 13 of the said Act. He elaborated that as the offence in this case was allegedly committed on 7-8-1998, prior to the enforcement of the said Act on 20-8-1997, the special Court had no jurisdiction in the matter.
5. I am afraid, the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is highly misconceived. A plain reading of the amended provision shows that under entry No. 2(a)(ii) the case of an alleged murder of a member of Armed Forces is exclusively triable by the Special-Court. The reference in clause (iii) "after the commencement of this Act" relates to the case of commission of robbery or dacoity. It has no relevance with (i) (ii), referred above.
6. In view of the above, this Constitutional petition has no merits and is accordingly dismissed in limine. H.B.T./N-88/L???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Petition dismissed.