Karachi: Anti Terrorism Court (ATC) has inquired in the case of violence against government employee by town chairman Chanesar that Farhan Ghani has been released under what section.The court remarked the record in this regard be presented before it.In the case violence against government employee , the accused including Farhan Ghani and lawyers appeared in the court.The court inquired during the hearing the statements of how many witnesses were recorded and were recorded when.The investigation officer told the court statements of two witnesses were recorded on August 24.Upon it court remarked according to statements of the witnesses the government work was got closed.The defence counsel tried to speak during it.The court asked to exercise restraint. You will be given opportunity.The court inquired releasing the accused during investigation is applicable in what case of terrorism. Under what section the accused persons were released and the application filed in the court is where.The learned judge said counsel of the plaintiff should present that law in the court. You should have given notice if the work was running .The defence counsel said if some is causing damage to road, streets and foot path then we will stop them. The accused was arrested then how could he give notice. If court wants it can approve terrorism related clauses or initiate proceedings.The defence counsel said if plea is not accepted under section 497 then terrorism clauses be abolished.The court said you should get record statement of the plaintiff under 164 and then bring it.The defence counsel said Sir is it so much important case that it is being seen minutely.The state counsel said transparent investigations have been made in respect of the case. Government work was going on and no terrorism has been committed.Special law of anti terrorism will not be applicable in this case. This is not ATC case. We give application.The court inquired from investigation officer how many statements have been recorded so far .The investigation officer said statements of two witnesses were obtained and then reconciliation took place.The court said there is no room for reconciliation in anti terrorism law. Under what law the statement of plaintiff was recorded.The court while expressing resentment over the investigation officer remarked have you studied law or not.The investigation officer said I don't see the statement of the plaintiff of the case. I am talking of evidence.The learned judge said we summon plaintiff of the case on next hearing.The counsel for the plaintiff said his client belongs to intelligence agency. We present the witnesses instead of complainant.The court while summoning the witnesses adjourned the hearing of the case till September 30.