1997 P Cr (PLP)
AKHTAR ZAMAN and another — Petitioners Versus BILQIAZ KHAN and another — Respondents
| Citation | 1997 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Peshawar |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | AKHTAR ZAMAN and another — Petitioners Versus BILQIAZ KHAN and another — Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1997 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1997 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Peshawar bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1997 P Cr (PLP) (AKHTAR ZAMAN and another — Petitioners Versus BILQIAZ KHAN and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Sanaullah Khan Gandapur for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.336/337-A(2)/337-F(2)/337-F(5)/ 506/34
Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) Act (XV of 1975), S.4
Klashnikov, according to F.I.R., having been used in the occurrence, case was to be heard by the Special Court constituted under the Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) Act, 1975 which had not been moved by the parties so far
Accused were consequently directed to first approach the said Special Court for redress of their grievance
Bail application was disposed of accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
Faridullah Khan for the Complainant. Date of hearing: 19th February, 1997. My this order will also dispose of the connected Criminal Miscellaneous No.275 of 1996 for cancellation of bail granted to the accused/respondent Latif Khan by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bannu vide order, dated 11-11-1996.
2. A case under section 336/337-A(2)/337-F(2)/337-F(5)/506/34, P.P.C. was registered against the accused/petitioner and their brother co-accused Latif Khan accused/respondent in the connected petition for causing criminal intimidation by firing at him ineffectively and also injuring him with sharp/blunt means at Police Station Kakki, Tehsil and District Bannu vide F.I.R. No.73, dated 15-8-1996.
3. Bail petitions for their release were moved before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Bannu, who vide his order, dated 28-10-1996 granted bail to the aforementioned accused.
4. Complainant aggrieved by the order of the learned Judicial Magistrate filed a bail cancellation petition in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Bannu which was later on transferred to Additional Sessions Judge, Bannu who cancelled the bail allowed to the petitioner while maintained that of co-accused Latif. Hence the present two petitions.
5. At the very outset, the learned counsel for the petitioner pointed but that klashnikov was used during the occurrence and this fact is mentioned in the F.I.R. itself.
6. The result to my mind is that the case shall have to be heard by the Special Judge appointed under the Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) Act, 1975. This being the position, the said two petitions have to be moved before the Special Court. The petitioners of both the petitions have not moved the Special Court constituted under the Act (ibid).
7. In consequence, both the petitions are dismissed. Petitioners are directed to first approach the Special Court for redress of their grievances, if so l desired and thereafter to this Court. N.H.Q./2105/P Petitions dismissed.