Peshawar High Court Rules Kidnapping for Ransom Case Triable by Anti-Terrorism Court

The Peshawar High Court has ruled that cases of kidnapping for ransom remain triable by Anti-Terrorism Courts when they fall under the Third Schedule of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, even if the ingredients of “terrorism” are not directly established.

A bench comprising Justice Mudassir Ameer and Justice Aurangzeb dismissed petitions filed by four accused in the high-profile Dr Warda Mushtaq murder case from Abbottabad.

The accused had sought the removal of Section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) from the FIR and transfer of the trial to a regular court.

The court upheld an earlier order of the Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC) Hazara region dated April 13, 2026, confirming that the case would continue under its jurisdiction.

Background of the Case

Dr Warda Mushtaq was allegedly taken from a hospital on December 4, 2025, by her friend Rida Waheed on the pretext of recovering jewelry. Her body was later recovered from a forest on December 8, 2025.

Police initially registered the FIR under multiple sections of the Pakistan Penal Code, along with Section 7 of the ATA. After confirmation of her death, Section 302 (murder) was also added.

Court’s Key Findings

In its detailed 16-page judgment, the bench examined whether the ATC Hazara Division had lawful jurisdiction to try the accused under Section 365-A (kidnapping for ransom) PPC, despite arguments that the case did not meet the definition of terrorism under Section 6 of the ATA.

The court ruled that Section 365-A PPC falls under Entry No. 4 of the Third Schedule of the ATA, making it triable by an Anti-Terrorism Court regardless of whether terrorism charges are ultimately proven.

It clarified that ATCs are empowered not only to hear terrorism-related offences but also “scheduled offences” listed under the Act.

The judgment further stated that while ordinary kidnapping for ransom may not always qualify as terrorism under the law, it still falls within ATC jurisdiction due to its inclusion in the Third Schedule.

Legal Impact

The court emphasized that ATCs may convict an accused under Section 365-A PPC alone if the prosecution fails to prove terrorism under Section 6 of the ATA.

It also noted that kidnapping for ransom poses a serious threat to public safety and was deliberately included in the Anti-Terrorism framework to ensure speedy trials of heinous crimes.

The ruling reinforces the jurisdiction of Anti-Terrorism Courts over scheduled offences and confirms that such cases cannot be transferred to ordinary courts merely based on the absence of terrorism intent.