ARSHAD MEHMOOD vs SPECIAL JUDGE-I, ANTI-TERRORISM COURT, ISLAMABAD Courts, duty of

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

ARSHAD MEHMOOD VS SPECIAL JUDGE-I, ANTI-TERRORISM COURT, ISLAMABAD Courts, duty of---Courts interpret what the law is and do not declare what the law shall be---While according meaning to words used in a statute, Court undertakes an interpretive exercise and what Court is essentially stating is meaning that is attributable to words used in the statute from the time when such statute was promulgated. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 203 ISLAMABADBookmark this Case ARSHAD MEHMOOD VS SPECIAL JUDGE-I, ANTI-TERRORISM COURT, ISLAMABAD art. 199---Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court---Scope---Jurisdiction which High Court exercises under art. 199 of the Constitution is limited to correcting any illegality or perversity in the judgment that is assailed before High Court. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 203 ISLAMABADBookmark this Case ARSHAD MEHMOOD VS SPECIAL JUDGE-I, ANTI-TERRORISM COURT, ISLAMABAD Punishment and crime---Social impact---Scope---Certainty of punishment and not severity of punishment that deters crime---Expeditious disposal of cases by ordinary courts cultivates public faith in rule of law. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 203 ISLAMABADBookmark this Case ARSHAD MEHMOOD VS SPECIAL JUDGE-I, ANTI-TERRORISM COURT, ISLAMABAD Objection---Principle---Question of jurisdiction is not technical one but goes to the heart of the authority that a court or tribunal exercises in seeking to enforce law of land---Any objection to jurisdiction of any tribunal conducting judicial proceedings has to be decided at the earliest to lay such objection to rest. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 203 ISLAMABADBookmark this Case ARSHAD MEHMOOD VS SPECIAL JUDGE-I, ANTI-TERRORISM COURT, ISLAMABAD Ss. 6, 7 & 23---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302, 324, 337-F(iii) & 148---Act of terrorism--- Factor of fear--- Scope--- On the allegations of Qatl-i-amd, attempt to Qatl-i-amd, Ghayr-Jaifah Mutalahimah and rioting armed with deadly weapons, trial was pending before Anti-Terrorism Court---Petitioner/accused sought transfer of case to Court of ordinary jurisdiction---Validity---Cultivation of fear as deterrence was the effect of action of claiming a human life---What distinguished imposition of sanction by State and imposition of sanction by a private party was intent behind such act---Cultivation of fear in and of itself could not be the determinant of whether an action had qualified as terrorism---Order passed by Anti-Terrorism Court refusing to transfer case to Court of ordinary jurisdiction was perverse in terms of its reasoning and conclusions drawn in view of evidence led by two prosecution witnesses with regard to the effect of actions attributed to the accused---Order in question was rendered by misapplying section 6 of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997---No offence in terms of Ss. 6 & 7 of Anti-Terrorism Act 1997, was made out against petitioner---High Court set-aside order in question passed by Anti-Terrorism Court and under S. 23 of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 transferred trial to Sessions Court---Constitutional petition was allowed, in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 203 ISLAMABADBookmark this Case ARSHAD MEHMOOD VS SPECIAL JUDGE-I, ANTI-TERRORISM COURT, ISLAMABAD S. 23---Jurisdiction---Determination---Trigger for purposes of determining question of jurisdiction is after Anti-Terrorism Court takes cognizance of the offence---No outer limit for making such determination---Such question can be determined even at the time of rendering final judgment if Anti-Terrorism Court were to conclude at such time that accused was not liable for offence of terrorism under S. 7 of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, or for any other scheduled offence---Upon forming such opinion, Anti-Terrorism Court needs to still transfer the case to a court of competent jurisdiction to pass judgment in relation to offences which do not constitute an offence of terrorism or a scheduled offence under Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 203 ISLAMABADBookmark this Case ARSHAD MEHMOOD VS SPECIAL JUDGE-I, ANTI-TERRORISM COURT, ISLAMABAD Judge, duty of---Judges while adjudicating cases lay down what the law is and not what it ought to be.

ARSHAD MEHMOOD vs SPECIAL JUDGE-I, ANTI-TERRORISM COURT, ISLAMABAD Courts, duty of — 2023 PCrLJ 203 ISLAMABAD

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 PCRLJ