IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

 

Special Criminal Anti-Terrorism Appeal No.202 of 2016

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date                   Order with Signature(s) of Judge(s)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Present:

 

Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi, J.

Abdul Maalik Gaddi, J.

 

Mehmood Ali Qureshi @ Tiger ………….                                Appellant

 

  versus

 

The State                                 ………….                             Respondent

 

 

Date of hearing & Decision:     13.06.2017

 

Mr. Muhammad Nasir, Advocate for the Appellant.

Mr. Muhammad Iqbal Awan, Assistant Prosecutor General, Sindh.

 

1. For hearing of case

2. For hearing of CMA No.7592/2016.

 

 

O R D E R

 

 

Abdul Maalik Gaddi, J. Through this Special Criminal Anti-Terrorism Appeal, the appellant Mehmood Ali Qureshi alias Tiger son of Mehboob Ali Qureshi has impugned the judgment dated 28.07.2016, passed by the learned Judge, Anti-Terrorism Court No.I, Karachi, in Special Case No.A-246 of 2015 in case Crime No.154 of 2015, under Section 4/5 Explosive Substance Act, read with Section 7 of ATA, 1997 registered with police station Korangi, Karachi, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced for the offence under Section 7(ff) of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 and sentenced for fourteen (14) years. The benefit of Section 382-B Cr.P.C. has also been extended.

 

2.       Brief facts of the prosecution case for the disposal of this appeal as narrated in the FIR are that on 18.06.2015, the complainant SIP Ghulam Sarwar registered above FIR at police station Korangi, Karachi, wherein he has stated that he alongwith his subordinate staff was on patrolling duty in official Mobile No.III for suppression of crime, during patrolling at 0015 hours, when they reached at Link Road, Sector 35-A, Zaman Town, Korangi, No.4, Karachi, they saw one person in suspicious condition, who on seeing police mobile tried to run away, but he was apprehended by the police. On inquiry, he disclosed his name as Mehmood Ali Qureshi alias Tiger Commando son of Mehboob Ali. Police recovered one Awan Bomb/Rifle Grenade, one mobile phone china made and one wallet containing Rs.150/- and some visiting cards from other pocket of his trouser. Appellant was arrested under memo of arrest and recovery and Incharge Bomb Disposal Unit was informed. Appellant and case property were brought at police station.  

 

3.       Prosecution in order to prove its case, examined in all four witnesses namely ASI Raja Dilshad as PW-1 at Ex.04, he produced memo of arrest and recovery and memo of inspection/place of incident at Ex.04/A and Ex.04/B respectively, SIP Ghulam Sarwar as PW-2 at Ex.05, he produced Roznamcha Entry No.25, copy of FIR and Roznamcha Entry No.29 at Ex.05/A to Ex.05/C respectively, Inspector Khan Muhammad Shaikh as PW-03 at Ex.06, he produced sketch of place of incident, joint Roznamcha entries No.40 and 49 and clearance certificate at Ex.06/A to Ex.06/C respectively. Finally, prosecution examined Inspector Dhani Bux Mari as PW-04 at Ex.07, he produced order of SSP, Korangi, Karachi dated 27.07.2015, letter addressed to SSP Special Branch Security, Final Report of Bomb Disposal Unit and letter addressed to Home Secretary, Government of Sindh, for sanction as Ex.07/A to Ex.07/D respectively. These witnesses have been cross examined. Thereafter prosecution has closed his side vide statement at Ex.08. 

 

4.       The appellant was examined under Section 342 Cr.P.C. at Ex.09 in which he has denied the allegations leveled by the prosecution. He has further stated in his statement that was innocent and has falsely been implicated by the police with malafide intention and nothing was recovered from his possession. The rifle grenade has been foisted against him. He further stated that on 05.06.2015, he was taken away by some unknown persons, who were in civil dresses, thereafter, he was shifted to some unknown place and subsequently, handed over to the police of police station Korangi, Karachi, who involved him in the present false case. the appellant, however, did not opt to examine himself on oath under Section 340(2) Cr.P.C. nor examine any witness in his defence.

 

5.       The trial Court after full dressed trial and having heard to either side, had reached at the conclusion that the prosecution had proved its case against the appellant, therefore, appellant was awarded the conviction and sentence as stated above. Hence, this appeal.  

 

6.       It is argued by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. Nothing was recovered from his possession. The alleged recovery of rifle grenade has been foisted upon him by the police at the instigation of their high-ups to show their efficiency. Per learned counsel, on 05.06.2015, appellant was taken away by some unknown persons, who were in civil dresses, thereafter, he was shifted to some unknown place and later on he was handed over to the police of police station Korangi, Karachi, who involved him in this case. During the course of arguments, the counsel, however, has advanced a proposal under the instruction of his client/appellant that the appellant would not press this appeal, if this Court may consider this period of his detention already undergone and reduce the sentence to that extent.

 

7.       Mr. Muhammad Iqbal Awan, learned A.P.G. appearing for the State has candidly conceded the proposal on the ground that the appellant as per jail roll dated 20.04.2017, is in jail since his arrest and has served out the substantive sentence.

 

8.       We have thoroughly examined the record with the able assistance of the learned APG and counsel for the appellant. In view of the record, we are of the opinion that the conviction of the appellant is based on cogent reasons. It is admitted by the learned APG that the appellant is first offender. No past criminal history against him is placed on record. As per jail roll, he aged about forty (40) years. He is in jail since his arrest, therefore, in the present scenario of the case, he has been sufficiently punished, hence, while keeping whole circumstances as well as future career of the appellant, so also to give him an opportunity to improve and reform himself, we are inclined to accept the proposal. Accordingly, while dismissing this appeal alongwith listed application, we maintain the conviction and reduce the sentence of the appellant to that of already undergone by him. The appellant has served out the substantive portion of the sentence, therefore, he shall be released forthwith, if he is not required to be detained in any other criminal case.

 

 

                                                                                       JUDGE

 

 

 

JUDGE

 

 

 

Faizan A. Rathore/PA*