THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Special Criminal Anti-Terrorism Appeal No.289 & 290 of 2018

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

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

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

Present: Mr. Justice Abdul Maalik Gaddi

Mr. Justice Amjad Ali Sahito

Appellant : Iqbal Shah son of Raqib Shah

through Mr. Muhammad Qasim,

Advocate.

Respondent : The State through Mr. Ali Haider

Saleem, Deputy Prosecutor General, Sindh.

Date of hearing : 10.04.2019

Date of Decision : 10.04.2019

J U D G M E N T

Abdul Maalik Gaddi, J.– Through instant special criminal anti-terrorism appeals, the appellant has challenged the common judgment dated 27.09.2018, passed by the learned Presiding Officer of Anti-Terrorism Court No.XIV, Inside Central Prison, Karachi in Special Cases No.388 and 389 of 2018 in Crime Nos.150 and 151 of 2018, registered under Section 4/5 Explosive Act read with Section 7 ATA, 1997 and Section 23(1)(a) of Sindh Arms Act, 2013 at police station Shah Latif Town, Karachi, whereby the learned trial after full dressed trial convicted the appellant for offence under Section 23(1)(a) of Sindh Arms Act, 2013 and sentenced him under Section 265-H(II), Cr.P.C. to suffer R.I. for three years with fine of Rs.3000/- and in default in payment of fine, it was further ordered that appellant shall suffer further S.I. for three months. Appellant was further convicted for offence under Section 5 of Explosive Substance Act and sentenced under Section 265-H(II), Cr.P.C. to suffer R.I. for three years. It was also ordered that all the sentences shall run concurrently. The benefit of Section 382-B Cr.P.C. was also extended to the appellant.

2. As per prosecution case, on 06.03.2018, SIP Khetomal of police station Shah Latif Town, along with police officials was performing patrolling duty, and upon receiving of spy information regarding the presence of a suspicious person at Chowkandi Graveyard Abdullah Goth road, Karachi and on such information, police party reached at pointed place, where present appellant was found, as such, police caught hold him and on personal search, one hand grenade and one 30 bore pistol with four live rounds were recovered from him. As accused failed to give any explanation or produced license of the weapon, he was arrested on spot under memo of arrest and recovery. Hence, these FIRs.

3. Today these appeals are fixed for final arguments. Learned counsel for the appellant during the course of arguments submits that on merits though the appellant has a good case for his acquittal on the ground that the whole case of the prosecution rest upon the evidence of police officials and no independent witness has been cited to witness the event. He further submits that the appellant is facing the agony of protracted trial since 2018, therefore, according to him, he would be satisfied and shall not press these appeals on merits, if the sentences awarded to the appellant by the learned trial Court are reduced to the period which he has remained in jail and the fines are remitted. Per learned counsel, the appellant is in jail since his arrest. He is in advance age and has no past criminal history. The appellant is only source for earnings of his family.

4. Learned Deputy Prosecutor General, Sindh has also raised no objection on the above proposition.

5. We have thoroughly examined the record with the able assistance of learned Deputy Prosecutor General Sindh and Counsel for the appellant. In view of the record, we are of the opinion that conviction of the appellant is based on cogent reasons. The appellant is first offender. No past criminal history against him is placed on record. He is in advance age, he is in jail since his arrest i.e. 06.03.2018 and is in jail for about one (1) year and ten (10) days, therefore, in the present scenario of the case, he has been sufficiently punished. In these circumstances, he needs to be given a chance in his life to rehabilitate himself.

6. Consequently, the conviction is maintained, however, the sentences awarded to the appellant by the trial Court through impugned judgment are reduced to one which he has already undergone and fines against him are also remitted.

7. With the above modification in the sentences, these appeals are dismissed alongwith listed applications. The appellant is in jail, he shall be released forthwith, if not required in any other criminal case.

JUDGE

Faizan A. Rathore/PA*