PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

MUHAMMAD HASSAN vs State Ss — 2023 PCrLJN 46 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation
2023 PCrLJN 46 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court
Sindh High Court
Year
2023
Parties
MUHAMMAD HASSAN vs State Ss
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 23; S. 6; Anti-Terrorism Act

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

Judgment text as reported

MUHAMMAD HASSAN VS State Ss. 6 & 23---'Terrorism'---Power to transfer cases to regular Courts---Scope---Petitioners assailed the dismissal of their application under S. 23 of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 for transfer of the matter to a regular Court of Session---Allegation as mentioned in the FIR was that thirteen accused persons staged an attack at the Otaaq of complainant as a result of which two persons died and also resorted to aerial firing--Attack was said to have been precipitated by a feud ensuing from an encounter regarding which an FIR was already got registered---Supreme Court in the judgment reported as 'Ghulam Hussain and others v. The State [PLD 2020 SC 61]' had essentially read down S. 6(3) of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 and had declared that an action falling under S. 6(2) would not itself constitute 'terrorism', but would require the coincidence of any of the objectives specified in clause (b) of S. 6(1) or the use of threat of such action to achieve any of the purposes mentioned in clause (c) thereof, failing which the action, albeit otherwise constituting an offence, would not qualify as "terrorism", irrespective of how grave, shocking, brutal, gruesome or horrifying such action might be---Furthermore, the judgment had gone on to clarify that the actions specified in S. 6(2) would not qualify to be labeled or characterized as terrorism if such actions were taken in furtherance of personal enmity or a private vendetta---Ingredients of S. 6(1)(b) and (c) were conspicuously absent in the matter at hand---Alleged link between the previous FIR and the action forming the basis of the present FIR did not suffice to bring such an action within the scope of terrorism, as circumscribed by the judgment in Ghulam Hussain's case---Impugned order was set aside and the case was transferred to a regular Court of competent jurisdiction for trial in accordance with law.

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English