ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

Criminal Bail Application No. 102 of 2017

 

Applicant:                              Majid s/o Shabbir, 

                                                 through Mr. Shafqat Zaman, advocate.

 

Respondent:                         The State, through Mr. Zahoor Shah, APG.

 

 

Date of hearing:                   23.02.2017

Date of order:                       23.02.2017

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

                                               

O R D E R

 

Zafar Ahmed Rajput, J:-          Through instant bail application, applicant Majid son of Shabbir seeks post arrest bail in Crime No. 156 of 2016, registered under section 23(1)(a) of Sindh Arms Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) at P.S. Pak Colony. His earlier bail application bearing No. 1712 of 2016 was heard and dismissed by the learned 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi-West, vide order dated 28.09.2016.

 

2.         As per the F.I.R., the applicant/ accused was arrested on 27.08.2016 by the police when after snatching mobile phone and Rs.1650/- from one Naveed Shaikh he was running away and from his personal search one 30 bore pistol was recovered along with three bullets.

 

3.         Learned counsel for the applicant has mainly contended that the applicant is innocent and falsely been implicated in this case; that he has already been granted bail in connected F.I.R. bearing No. 155 of 2016, registered under section 392/ 34 P.P.C. on 27.09.2016 by the trial Court; that the accused was allegedly arrested from thickly populated area but no person of the locality has been made mashir of recovery; that a pistol of 30 bore does not fall within the meaning of “firearms”, as defined under section 2(d) of the Act to attract section 23(1)(a) of the Act, hence, the case of accused falls within the ambit of further inquiry. In this regard, the learned counsel has relied upon the case of MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE V. THE STATE (2014 P. Cr. L.J. 1430).

 

4.         On the other hand, learned APG for the State has opposed this application on the ground that the accused was apprehended by the police when he was attempting to run away after snatching a mobile phone and cash amount from one Naveed Shaikh, who is also witness in this case, hence he is not entitled for the concession of bail.

 

5.         Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and learned APG and perused the material available on record.

 

6.         It appears that the accused was arrested on 27.08.2016, since then he is in judicial custody. Police has submitted challan against him, as such, he is no more required for further investigation. The accused has already been admitted to bail by the learned Ist. Judicial Magistrate, Karachi-East in connected case arising out of F.I.R. No. 155 of 2016. Section 23(1)(a) provides that whoever acquires, possesses, carries or controls any firearm or ammunition in infringement of section 3, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to fourteen years and with fine. Section 2(d) of the Act defines “firearms” in the following manner:-

 

(d)       “Firearms” means weapons designed to discharge a projectile or projectiles of any kind by the action of gun powder or any explosive or other forms of energy and includes:-

 

(i)        Artillery hand-grenades, riot-pistols or weapons of any kind designed for the discharge of any noxious liquid, gas etc;

 

(ii)       Accessories for any such firearm, intended to diminish the noise or flash caused by the firing thereof;

 

(iii)      Parts of, and machinery for manufacturing firearms; and

(iv)     carriages, platforms and appliances for mounting, transporting and serving artillery;

7.         The word “projectile” has not been further defined in the said Act, however, as per available meaning in Webster’s New Words, College Dictionary, Third Edition, projectile is an object designed to be hurled or shot forward as canon shell or rocket or anything thrown forward.

 

8.         However, “arms” has been defined under section 2(c) of the Act as under:-

(c) “arms” means articles, designed as weapons of offence or defence and includes rifles, pistols, revolvers, grenades, swords, bayonets, and other lethal weapon. It shall also include machinery (and its parts) for manufacturing arms, but excludes articles designed solely for domestic or agricultural purposes and weapon incapable of being used otherwise that as toys or of being converted into serviceable weapon.”

 

Further, section 24 of the Act provides punishment for possessing arms with intent to use for unlawful purposes and section 25 of the Act provides punishment for use and case with imprisonment for a term which extend to ten years. Hence, it is yet to be determined during the trial as to whether the alleged 30 bore pistol falls within the definition of “firearm” punishable under section 23(1)(a) of the Act or under definition of “arms” punishable under section 24 or as the case may be under section 25 of the Act. Therefore, it is a fit case of further inquiry.

 

9.         Accordingly, accused is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

 

10.       Needless to mention here that if applicant in any manner tries to misuse the concession of bail, it would be open for the trial Court to cancel his bail after issuing him the requisite notice.

                                                                                                            JUDGE

 

hanif