2007 P Cr (PLP)
NASEER AHMED — Petitioner Versus JUDGE ANTI-TERORRISM COURT-III, LAHORE and 3 others — Respondents
| Citation | 2007 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | NASEER AHMED — Petitioner Versus JUDGE ANTI-TERORRISM COURT-III, LAHORE and 3 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2007 P Cr (PLP)?
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: 2007 P Cr (PLP) (NASEER AHMED — Petitioner Versus JUDGE ANTI-TERORRISM COURT-III, LAHORE and 3 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Abdul Razzaq Younas for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 6(1)(g)(m) & (n)
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199
Constitutional petition
Setting aside order of the Special Court
F.I.R. showed allegation that petitioner/accused had blocked the road through burnt tyres; that when the police party tried to remove the hindrances to open the road,. apart from firing in the air, stones were also thrown on the police party by .the accused and some of .the officials were also .injured
No medico-legal report of any of the injured was shown
No recovery of any stone/brick or of any of the burnt vehicles or tyres was made
No statement of any person from the public was recorded to the effect. that the road was blocked and because of the act of accused any one had suffered any trouble
Jurisdiction of Special Court could be determined on the basis of F.I.R. and other material produced by the prosecution at the time of presentation of the challan
Investigation in the case was complete
Alleged incident was recorded two days after its occurrence
Such delay of two days also smacked of mala fides on the part of the police
Impugned order of the Special Court was set aside and police was directed by the High Court, to submit the challan of the case in the ordinary criminal court of competent jurisdiction.
Judgment & Decree
In support of this petition, it is submitted that nobody was injured, there is not on record M.L.R. of any of the injured; no stone/brick was taken into possession; no vehicle, scooter or motorcycle was burnt; none from the public appeared before the police to make statement that because of the act of the petitioners, the road was blocked and he suffered any sort of trouble and that to support the story coined up in the F.I.R., statements of only three police officials were recorded.
2. On the other hand, learned A.A.-G. submits that sub-clause (1) (g)(1)(m) and (n) of section 6 of the Anti-Terrorism Act are fully attracted. He supports the impugned order of the trial Court.
3. We have gone through the police file brought by Inspector Basharat Ahmad, S.H.O. Police Station Bhatti Gate, Lahore. It was alleged in the F.I.R. that-the accused of the F.I.R. had blocked the road through burnt tyres and when the police party tried to remove the hindrances to open the road, apart from firing in the air, stones were also .thrown on the police party by the accused and some of the officials were also injured. After scanning the whole file we have not been able to see M.L:R. of any of the injured. person; recovery of any stone/brick, A recovery of any of the burnt vehicle or tyres; statement of any person from the public to the effect that the road was blocked and because of this act of the petitioner he suffered any trouble except the statements of three police officials. The question of jurisdiction of Special Court can be determined on the basis of the F.I.R.' and the other material produced by the prosecution at the time of presentation of the challan. For this view, we are fortified from a judgment of apex Court of the country reported as 1994 SCMR
717. In the instant case, the investigation is complete and only now challan is to be submitted and there is nothing on record except the statements of the three police officials. Moreover, the alleged incident of which the petitioners are accused took place on 25-5-2007 but the F.I.R. was recorded on 27-5-2002. This delay of two days also smacks of mala fide on the part of the police. For what has been observed above, this writ petition is allowed, impugned order of the' Special Court is set aside and the police is directed to submit the challan against the petitioner in the ordinary Criminal Court of competent jurisdiction. H.B.T./N-68/L Petition allowed.