| Case ID |
0beb8c6e-55eb-4a11-b613-7c0f649ec3ba |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Special Criminal A.T.As. Nos. 147, 148 of 2019, 22 |
| Decision Date |
Dec 18, 2019 |
| Hearing Date |
Dec 03, 2019 |
| Decision |
In this case, the Sindh High Court acquitted the appellants in Special Criminal Anti-Terrorism Appeals Nos. 147, 148 of 2019, 224, and 225 of 2018. The court determined that the prosecution had failed to provide sufficient evidence to convict the accused beyond a reasonable doubt. Key issues included contradictory witness testimonies regarding the recovery of grenades, improper recording of confessional statements by the judicial magistrate, and failure of the prosecution to present credible and coherent evidence. The court emphasized the importance of the prosecution's burden to prove the case confidently and found that the evidence presented was riddled with inconsistencies and lacked corroboration. As a result, the appellants were acquitted and ordered to be released. The decision underscores the judiciary's commitment to upholding justice by ensuring that convictions are based on reliable and incontrovertible evidence. |
| Summary |
The Sindh High Court, on December 18, 2019, deliberated on Special Criminal Anti-Terrorism Appeals Nos. 147, 148 of 2019, 224, and 225 of 2018, involving appellants Javed and others versus The State. Presided over by Justices Mohammad Iqbal Kalhoro and Abdul Mobeen Lakho, the case centered around allegations under the Explosive Substances Act, 1908, the Anti Terrorism Act, 1997, and the Sindh Arms Act, 2013. The prosecution accused the appellants of possessing illegal arms and explosives, including grenades, rifles, and SMGs, seized during a snap operation by the Pakistan Rangers and the Bomb Disposal Unit at Police Station Nabi Bakhsh, Karachi, on February 1, 2017. However, the appeal focused on significant shortcomings in the prosecution's case, including conflicting witness statements regarding the type and number of grenades recovered, delays in recording confessional statements, and the lack of corroborative evidence to substantiate the accused's intentions to commit terrorism or endanger public safety. The court meticulously analyzed numerous citations, including pivotal cases like Tariq Pervez v. The State (1995) and Muhammad Nawaz and others v. The State (2005), reinforcing the principle that the burden of proof lies with the prosecution to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Key issues highlighted in the judgment included the unreliability of prosecution witnesses, discrepancies in grenade types described (hand grenades versus rifle grenades), and procedural lapses in obtaining and validating confessions under the Criminal Procedure Code. The judges underscored that the mere recovery of weapons does not suffice for conviction unless accompanied by credible evidence establishing the accused's intent to misuse such weaponry for illicit purposes. The decision emphasized stringent adherence to legal protocols to prevent miscarriages of justice, ultimately leading to the acquittal of the appellants. This case serves as a benchmark in Pakistani jurisprudence, reiterating the necessity for robust and consistent evidence in terrorism-related prosecutions and safeguarding the rights of the accused against flimsy or contradictory evidence. For legal professionals, it underscores the critical importance of thorough evidence appraisal and adherence to procedural fairness, while for the public, it reinforces trust in the judicial system's commitment to justice and equity. Additionally, this case highlights the ongoing challenges in combating terrorism through legal means, emphasizing the need for meticulous investigative practices and reliable evidence gathering to ensure that justice prevails without compromising individual rights or the integrity of legal proceedings. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Sindh High Court,
The State,
Javed,
Pakistan Rangers,
Muhammad Suleman,
FSL,
Shoukat Ali,
Muhammad Shakeel,
Bomb Disposal Unit,
Special Prosecution Rangers,
Police Station Nabi Bakhsh
|
| Judges |
Mohammad Iqbal Kalhoro, Justice,
Abdul Mobeen Lakho, Justice
|
| Lawyers |
Syed Mehmood Alam Rizvi,
Siraj Ali Khan Chandio, Additional Prosecutor General and Special Prosecution Rangers
|
| Petitioners |
Javed and Others
|
| Respondents |
The State
|
| Citations |
2021 SLD 1329 = 2021 PCRLJ 576
|
| Other Citations |
Tariq Pervez v. The State 1995 SCMR 1345,
Muhammad Nawaz and another v. The State PLD 2005 SC 40,
Muhammad Pervez and others v. The State and others 2007 SCMR 670,
Zubair Ahmed alias Ladu v. The State 2018 YLR Note 160,
Aqeel alias Tiloo v. The State 2018 PCr.LJ Note 12,
Abdul Kari alias Patni v. The State 2018 PCr.LJ 1358,
Asif Khan v. The State 2018 YLR 661,
Sikandar alias Sani v. The State 2018 MLD 1220,
Abdur Rehman v. The State 2018 YLR 1629,
Siraj Ahmed v. The State 2011 PCr.LJ 48,
Salman alias Lamba and others v. The State 2018 YLR 1092,
Asmatullah and others v. The State 2018 PCr.LJ 1042,
Mohammad Shah v. The State 2010 SCMR 1009,
Muhammad Nawaz and others v. The State and others [2016 SCMR 267],
Akhtar Muhammad v. The State 1985 PCr.LJ 1118,
Notice to Police Constable Khizar Hayat PLD 2019 SC 527
|
| Laws Involved |
Explosive Substances Act, 1908,
Anti Terrorism Act, 1997,
Sindh Arms Act, 2013
|
| Sections |
4,
5,
7,
23(1)(a)
|