- —Sections 5 & 6 and 53—APC—Sections 302, 324 etc.— bail matter—nature of offences and quantum of punishment as compared to ordinary laws—word terrorism is defined under section 6—according to the provisions of this special law, the nature of offence and quantum of punishment is quite different from nature and quantum of punishment provided in the ordinary laws—relating to bail section 53 lays down some special conditions and procedure. Muhammad Azad Khan vs State through Advocate General 2018 SCR 499 (B)
- —Sections 6 & 46—APC—Sections 302, 324 etc.—-bail grant of—the purpose of enforcement of special law and establishment of Special Courts is speedy trial of cases—delaying tactics or any other cause in of case, amounts to frustrate the very purpose of the enforcement of Special law. Muhammad Azad Khan vs State through Advocate General 2018 SCR 499 (A & C)
- —Section 5(1) (b) of ATA, 2014—-‘act of terrorism’ defined— if offences of death, grievous violence against a person or grievous bodily injury or harm to a person, grievous damage to property, kidnapping, hijacking etc., are committed with the object/purpose to coerce and threat or scare the Government or the public or a section of the public or community or sect or a foreign Government or population or an international organization or creates a sense of fear or insecurity in society then the provisions of ATA shall be attracted. Umar Arif & 6 others v. Sessions Judge Muzaffarabad & 5 others 2020 SCR 222 (C)
- — section 5(1)(b) of ATA 2014—act of terrorism, defined–mere heinousness of offence does not constitute act of terrorism–offence must be committed with the object/purpose as defined in section 5(1)(b),of the Act, 2014— After going through the relevant provisions of law, we are of the considered view that the cases in which any act is done in furtherance of personal enmity or private vendetta, even if the same is heinous in nature but the object of the same is not as has been mentioned in section 5(1)(b) of ATA then such cases do not come within the ambit of ATA. Nothing has been mentioned in the challan that the accused did the act of murder to achieve any object/purpose enumerated in section 5(1)(b), ATA. Appeal as well as the writ petition accepted and case transferred to District Criminal Court from the Anti-Terrorism Court Umar Arif & 6 others v. Sessions Judge Muzaffarabad & 5 others 2020 SCR 222 (B)
error: Content is protected !!