| Case ID |
42aaf8bf-4c3d-4fd0-9226-aca532047cbd |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 8329-B of 2023 |
| Decision Date |
Jun 06, 2023 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The Lahore High Court allowed the criminal miscellaneous petition, recognizing that the offence of firing in court premises fell under the jurisdiction of the Anti-Terrorism Court as outlined in Entry No. 4 of the Third Schedule of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997. The court highlighted that, despite the case being rooted in personal vendetta and not terrorism, the nature of the offence necessitated its trial in the Anti-Terrorism Court. The court ordered the transfer of the case from the ordinary court to the Anti-Terrorism Court, allowing the accused to file a bail petition there. This decision was based on established legal precedents and the provisions of the law, ensuring the proper jurisdictional handling of heinous offences committed within court premises. |
| Summary |
In the case of ALI NAWAZ vs. The STATE, the Lahore High Court addressed the jurisdictional complexities surrounding a post-arrest bail petition linked to an incident of firing within court premises. This case underscored the application of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, specifically focusing on the interpretation of scheduled offences that warrant exclusive trial by the Anti-Terrorism Court. The decision emphasized the importance of jurisdictional integrity in criminal proceedings, particularly in cases involving heinous offences that do not necessarily fall under traditional definitions of terrorism. The ruling not only reinforced legal precedents but also provided clarity on the procedural pathways for transferring cases between courts, ensuring that justice is administered efficiently and appropriately. Key legal principles involved include the direct cognizance powers of Anti-Terrorism Courts and the procedural safeguards outlined in the Criminal Procedure Code. The court's decision serves as a critical reference point for future cases involving similar jurisdictional challenges, highlighting the necessity for a clear understanding of the law governing anti-terrorism measures in Pakistan. |
| Court |
Lahore High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
Muhammad Amjad Rafiq, J
|
| Lawyers |
Sardar Nadeem Abbas Dogar,
Rai Akhtar Hussain Kharal,
Muhammad Moeen Ali,
Ms. Noshe Malik,
Malik Mukhtar Ahmad Ranjha
|
| Petitioners |
ALI NAWAZ
|
| Respondents |
The STATE and another
|
| Citations |
2024 SLD 2827,
2024 PCRLJ 658
|
| Other Citations |
Ghulam Hussain and others v. The State and others PLD 2020 SC 61,
Rao Fahd Ali Khan v. The State and another 2014 PCr.LJ 1071,
Mir Ali v. The State and another 2020 PCr.LJ 1060,
Ali Akbar and another v. The State PLD 1995 Kar. 10,
Azhar Hussain and others v. Government of Punjab and others 1992 PCr.LJ 2308,
Allah Din and 18 others v. The State and another 1994 SCMR 717,
Rana Abdul Ghaffar v. Abdul Shakoor and 3 others PLD 2006 Lah. 64,
Mir Zaman v. Zubair and another 2003 PCr.LJ 1086,
Fida Hussain v. Additional Sessions Judge, Jampur, District Rajanpur and another 2006 PCr.LJ 1551,
Muhammad Hanif v. The Crown PLD 1956 Lah. 394,
Ghulam Hussain and others v. The State 1985 PCr.LJ 2334,
Y.K. Lee v. D.I.G. Sargodha and 4 others 2007 YLR 1554,
Muhammad Akbar Khan and 3 others v. S.H.O. P.S. Garhi Khairo, District Jacobabad and others 2017 PCr.LJ 1280,
Muhammad Jawad Hamid v. Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif and others PLD 2018 Lah. 836
|
| Laws Involved |
Anti Terrorism Act, 1997,
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898),
Penal Code (XLV of 1860),
Pakistan Arms Ordinance, 1965
|
| Sections |
19(3),
23,
32,
497,
526,
528,
324,
109,
148,
149,
13(2a)
|