1. GHULAM NABI SOOMRO. J.---The present Revision Application has been preferred against the order, dated 29-1-2002 whereby the learned Judge of the Anti-Terrorism Court, Sukkur and Larkana Divisions at .Sukkur has refused to transfer the applicant's case to the Court .of Session, by rejecting his application under section 23 of the Anti-Terrorism Act.
2. The applicant stands challaned for offence under sections 216, P.P.C. and 21-J of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act) and his case is pending trial before the above said Court. The allegation against the applicant is that he was harbouring accused Rajib who was required by police in two cases of Police Station Kandhra bearing Crime No, '68 of 1999 under section 17/3 of the Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 and Crime No, 69 of 1999 under sections 53/324, P.P.C.
3. It is contended on behalf of the applicant that the applicant is not alleged to have harboured any person alleged to have committed an offence under the Act as such section 21-J of the Act (supra) shall not be applicable. It is also urged that even in the impugned order it is not shown that the accused Rajib was an accused of an offence under the Act. It was argued that it was evident even from the impugned order that the accused was involved in some cases pending before the learned S.T.A. Court and not before an Anti-Terrorism Court.
4. Mr. Sher Muhammad Shar, learned A.A.-G. appearing for the State does not controvert the above contentions raised in support of the revision application.
5. For its proper examination, section 21-J of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 is reproduced as under: "211. Harbouring.---(1) A person commits an offence if he harbours any person who has committed an offence under this Act.
(2) A person guilty of an offence under subsection (1) shall be liable on convection to punishment as provided in sections 216 and 216A of the Pakistan Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860)."
6. From perusal of the section, subsection (1) above, stipulates that the accused stated to be harboured must be an accused of an offence under the Act.
7. Admittedly the accused Rajib stated to be harbored by the applicant is not the accused of any offence under the Act. The learned A.A.-G. has rightly supported the revision application which is hereby allowed.
8. Resultantly, the Case No, 336 of 2002 pending trial before the Anti-Terrorism Court-I, Sukkur is hereby withdrawn from his file and transferred to the learned Court of Sessions Judge, Sukkur.