' MALIK MANZOOR HUSSAIN, J.---This appeal is directed against the judgment passed by learned Special Judge, Anti-Terrorism Court-I, Peshawar dated 14-11-2012, whereby the appellant/convict Mehruban Shah, charged in case F.I.R. No.772 dated 21-9-2010 under sections 3/4, Explosive Substances Act/7, A.T.A. 1997, Police Station Mathra, Peshawar was convicted and sentenced under section 7(FF), A.T.A. To undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 14 years while benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Was extended.
2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that on the night of 21-9-2010, a private school situated within the jurisdiction of Police Station Mathra, was blasted through explosive device. The night watchman namely Akbar Khan (P.W.7) reported the crime to the SHO, and the case was registered. The appellant was arrested on 18-9-2011 and on 21-9-2011, he made a confession before the Judicial Magistrate for committing his involvement in blasting school along with co-accused named in the confession. After completion of investigation, challan against appellant and his co-accused was submitted in the court of Special Judge, Anti-Terrorism Court, Peshawar.
3. In order to prove its case the prosecution examined 8 P.Ws., out of whom P.W.1 Qaisar DFC executed the warrants under section 204, Cr.P.C. And proclamation notices under section 87, Cr.P.C.
Against absconding accused Ajmal alias Salman, Ziaur Rehman, Abdul Haleem and Farid; P.W.2 Khaliq Dad Khan Inspector obtained police custody of accused Zain Khan and Abdul Manan, interrogated them and recorded their statements under section 161, Cr.P.C.; P.W.3 Muhammad Jameel Khan then posted as JMIC, Peshawar recorded confessional statement of appellant/convict Mehruban Shah; P.W.4 Muhammad Miskeen Khan Inspector investigated the instant case; P.W.5 Ghani-ur-Rehman SI is marginal witness to recovery memo Exh.PC vide which the 10 took into possession two safety fuse Exh.P.1 from the spot; P.W.6 KhaistaRehman SI is also marginal witness to pointation memos Exh.P.W.4/3, Exh.P.W.4/7, Exh.P.W.4/11 vide which appellant and other co-accused made pointation of the spot to the I.O. In his presence; P.W.7 is complainant Akbar Khan who narrated the whole story about the occurrence and P.W.8 Ameer Sultan Khan Inspector submitted supplementary challan as well as complete challan against all the accused.
4. At the conclusion of prosecution evidence, all the accused facing trial were examined under section 342, Cr.P.C., wherein, they opted not to be examined on oath or to produce defence evidence. The learned trial Court after hearing the parties, acquitted the remaining co-accused whereas appellant/convict Mehruban Shah was convicted under section 7(ff), A.T.A. And sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 14 years vide judgment passed dated 14-11-2012, however benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Was extended to him and the absconding co-accused were declared as Proclaimed Offenders.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the appellant had not been nominated in the F.I,R. As the same was lodged against unknown accused. He further contended that no corroborative evidence in support of confessional statement of the appellant was recorded by the prosecution in support of their case and badly failed to prove the guilt of the appellant. He further contended that the appellant was arrested in another case registered under F.I.R. No.108 - dated 8- 2-2011 under sections 302/324/353/427, P.P.C., 120-B, P.P.C., 3/4 Exp: Sub: Act/ 7, A.T.A., Police Station Mathra and the appellant has already been acquitted in the mentioned case.
6. Conversely, the learned AAG appearing on behalf of the learned counsel for the State, supported the judgment of the conviction on the ground that the appellant confessed his guilt through the confessional statement recorded before the Judicial Magistrate, which was voluntary and inculpatory in nature. He further submitted that this court should take notice of the alarming situation in this part of the country wherein, such like offences are committed rapidly and the lives of innocent students are at the mercy of such like miscreants.
' Arguments heard, record perused.
7. We have given due considerations to the arguments and have gone through the record with the valuable assistance of learned counsel for the parties.
8. Perusal of the record reveals that the present appellant was arrested in the case on 1-9-2011; (sic.) he made confession on 21-9-2011, (sic.) which eliminates the possibility of use of coercion or inducement. The promptitude with which the confessional statement was got recorded, depict volunteerness.
9. With the assistance of learned counsel for the parties we have A also gone through the statement of learned Judicial Magistrate, Muhammad Jamil Khan, who recorded the confessional statement of the appellant, which reveals that all the necessary formalities as enumerated in section 164, Cr.P.C. Were duly complied with prior to recording statement of appellant under section 164, Cr.P.C. We are not persuaded with the contention of learned counsel for the appellant that the confessional statement was the result of maltreatment and coercive measures and have noticed that while being examined under section 342, Cr.P.C., the appellant not only gave affirmative 'answer to the question of confession with the somersault sort that the same was recorded in another case.
10. It is well-settled that when an accused person retracts or resile from his confession then the onus lies on him that he did not record any confession. Nothing has been brought on record to show that the confession was not voluntary or same was result of maltreatment or inducement.
Conviction can be based on the sole confessional statement, provided the same is voluntary and true and there is no basic difference between the confession already recorded or the retracted confession if the element of truth is not missing. Reliance can be safely placed on the reported case, "State through AG, N. -W.F.P. Peshawar v. Waqar Ahmad, 1992 SCM R 950."
11. It is worth-mentioning that appellant while recording his confessional statement have admitted that he was persuaded by Qari Haq Nawaz to join his group involved in blasting the schools, colleges and government buildings. Thus on the relevant night he along with the co-accused named in confession prepared explosive device and took it to the school where it was planted and exploded. In presence of clean breast admission made by the appellant strong grounds exists about his involvement in the crime on the available record. We can safely conclude that the occurrence was result of the reason as stated by the appellant in his confessional statement. So far the objection of the learned counsel for the appellant that the confessional statement though recorded by the Judicial Magistrate by himself and signed by him does not contain the seal of the court, is irrelevant and misconceived. It is settled preposition of law that notwithstanding the procedural defect in the confessional statement, a judicial confession, if it is found true, voluntary and confidence-inspiring can safely be made basis for conviction. The provision of section 164, Cr.P.C. And 364, Cr.P.C. Apply to all sorts of statements and confessional statement recorded under section 164, Cr.P.C. And the missing of the stamp which caused no prejudice or injustice to the appellant does not vitiate the admissibility of the confessional statement. Reliance can be made on the case of "Nazir alias Wazir v. The State PLD 2007 SC 2002".
12. In view of peculiar circumstances of the case and the situation faced by the inhabitants of this part of the country, such like cases should be dealt with iron hands and no leniency should be shown for such a heinous crime. In a number of cases we have noticed that the schools are blown and the government property is damaged by the miscreant. The life of the inhabitants of this area had become miserable due to the activities of which the appellant had been involved. Such-like terrorist activities had created a sense of fear in society and we have no hesitation in our mind to hold that the prosecution has proved its case against the accused beyond, shadow of doubt.
13. In view of the above, while placing implicit reliance on the above cited rulings delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan with regard to confessional statement, the conviction of the appellant is maintained. This appeal being without any substance is dismissed. #EndJudgment