2007 PLP 1310 (SCMR)
MEHBOOB AHMAD — Petitioner Versus SPECIAL JUDGE, ANTI-TERRORISM COURT, FAISALABAD and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2007 PLP 1310 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Faqir Muhammad Khokhar and Ghulam Rabbani, JJ |
| Parties | MEHBOOB AHMAD — Petitioner Versus SPECIAL JUDGE, ANTI-TERRORISM COURT, FAISALABAD and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Penal Code (XLV of 1860) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 PLP 1310 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Penal Code (XLV of 1860) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2007 PLP 1310 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Faqir Muhammad Khokhar and Ghulam Rabbani, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PLP 1310 (SCMR) (MEHBOOB AHMAD — Petitioner Versus SPECIAL JUDGE, ANTI-TERRORISM COURT, FAISALABAD and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- M.A. Zafar, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Anwar Ahmad Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing; 1st November, 2006.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment/order, dated 5-10-2006 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, passed in Writ Petition No.8754 of 2006).
Ss. 365-A/343/384/148/149/34
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)
High Court after going through the material placed before it had reached the conclusion that, prima facie, offence under S.365-A, P.P.C. was attracted in the case
Anti-Terrorism Court, therefore, had justifiably assumed jurisdiction
Findings recorded by High Court did not need to be substituted by Supreme Court in the absence of any compelling reason
Impugned judgment did not suffer from any legal infirmity
Leave to appeal was refused accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, J.
The petitioner is an accused in F.I.R. No.410 registered for offences under sections 365-A/148/149/343/384 and 34, P.P.C. He is being tried by the Anti-Terrorism Court, Faisalabad. He moved an application under section 23 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 for transfer of the case to an ordinary Court which was declined. Therefore, he filed Writ Petition No.8754 of 2006 which was dismissed by a learned Division Bench of Lahore High Court, Lahore, vide impugned judgment, dated 5-10-2006.
2. The learned counsel argued that at one point of time the offence under section 365-A, P.P.C. was deleted and the challan was submitted before the Judicial Magistrate. However, section 365-A, was added during the course of reinvestigation. Therefore, it was fit case for trial by an ordinary criminal Court which had taken cognizance of the offence.
3. We have heard the learned counsel at some length and have also perused the available record. The High Court came to the conclusion, after going through the material placed before it, that prima facie the offence under section 365-A, P.P.C. was attracted. Therefore, the Anti-Terrorism Court had justifiably assumed the jurisdiction. The findings recorded by the High Court need not be substituted by us in the absence of any compelling reasons. The impugned judgment does not suffer from any legal infirmity so as to warrant interference by this Court.
4. For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any merit in this petition which is dismissed and leave to appeal is refused accordingly. N.H.Q./M-204/SC Leave refused.