Ch. Mushtaq Ahmad, J.--Muhammad Ishaq, appellant was returned guilty verdict in case F.I.R No, 313 dated 10.5.2014 registered under Section 25-D of Telegraph Act, 1885 read with Section 7 of Anti- Terrorism Act, 1997 at Police Station Chehlyak, District Multan.
2. After having gone through the evidence brought on record and hearing the parties, learned Judge, Anti Terrorism Court No, II, Multan vide his judgment dated 2.11.2016 convicted and sentenced the appellant as under:-- 1.Convicted u/S. 25-D of Telegraph Act, 1885, PPC and sentenced to 3-Years R.I. with fine of Rs, 3000/- and in the event of default to undergo further simple imprisonment for 15-days.
2.Convicted u/S. 7(h) of Anti Terrorism Act, 1997 and sentenced to 05 Years R.I. with fine of Rs, 5000/- and in the event of default to undergo further simple imprisonment for one month.
Benefit of Section 382-B, Cr.P.C.was extended to the appellant.
3. Prosecution case was that on 10.5.2014 Ali Hassan Gillani the then S.I. (complainant) was present at Ghanta Ghar Chowk, Multan alongwith four other police officials where he received information that a call was received through service counter 15 by Operator Kashif Javed 2256-C from mobile phone No, 0304-7889106 herein caller told that a bomb was going to blast within half an hour n District Courts, Multan, said information was passed on to CPO, sultan in order to take protective measures; that upon this information all the police officials reached at the spot alongwith Bomb Disposal Squad, Fire Brigade, Rescue 1122 Ambulance and reserved police officials of Special Branch; that a thorough search was conducted at the spot but no bomb was detected and that due to the said false information provided by accused about bomb blast a sense of fear and insecurity was created amongst the Judges, Lawyers, general public and Government servants who were working there.
4.Prosecution in order to prove its case got examined nine witnesses. After giving up PWs, namely, Muhammad Ashraf 404-C. Pervaiz Ahmad 4695-C, Abdul Ghaffar and Muhammad Ishfaq 4320/HC, Muhammad Latif Inspector and Ashraf Wahla, Inspector being unnecessary prosecution closed its case on 26.10.2016. Thereafter statement of accused under Section 342, Cr.P.C. was recorded in which he denied the charge.
5.Learned trial Court after hearing arguments of learned counsel for the parties recorded conviction and awarded sentence to the appellant as mentioned in the 'opening paragraph of this judgment.
6.Contention of learned counsel for the appellant is that alleged SIM from which call was made on 15 was not in the name of the appellant father it was registered in the name of one Qaiser Iqbal who was not associated with the investigation for the reasons best known to the prosecution; that none of the witnesses claimed that appellant was member of any terrorist group or organization or his name was included in 4th schedule; that despite registration of F.I.R, Joint Investigation Team constituted for the purpose of investigation did not complete its investigation even after lapse of two years of the incident which fact is sufficient to make the prosecution case highly doubtful and that the judgment passed by learned trial Court is the result of mis-reading and non-reading of evidence which resulted in miscarriage of justice, hence, appellant may be acquitted.
7.Contentions have been opposed. It has been argued that appellant got issued SIM in the name of Qaiser lqbal with the help of his CNIC and thereafter by using the said SIM he made call to rescue one five regarding fake information of bomb blast in District Courts Multan; that during investigation record of CDR of mobile phone and SIM was taken into possession by the 1.0. along with record of one five center which was compatible to each other and that learned trial Court after considering all aspects of the case rightly convicted the appellant.
8.Arguments heard. Record perused.
9.Appellant was charged on the allegation that on 10.5.2014 at about 9.50 a.m. through mobile phone 0304-7889106 he made obnoxious telephonic call at Police Service Centre Rescue 15, Multan attended by Operator Kashif Javed, 2256-C (PW-2) that within half an hour a bomb is going to blast in the premises of District Courts, Multan, so they should adopt safeguards, if possible. On this information All Hassan Gillani, the then S.I. (PW-7) alongwith four other police constables reached at the spot and informed the relevant agencies including Rescue 1122, Bomb Disposal Squad, Fire Brigade, etc. A thorough search was conducted but no bomb was detected in the said premises
10. PW-7 Ali Hassan Gillani Inspector, PW-2 Kashif Javed 2256-C, PW-4 Zafar Iqbal and PW-8 Bashir Ahmed, Inspector/I.O are the main witnesses of this case. None of them uttered a single word that present appellant was member of any terrorist group or organization involved in terrorist activities.
What was his purpose to make fake call prosecution evidence is silent. Admittedly appellant was not named in the First Information Report. Neither the SIM in question was in his name nor the same was recovered from his possession during investigation. There is no forensic report qua comparison of voice report which might have established that aforesaid call was made by the present appellant. Record shows that appellant was never enlisted in 4th Schedule of ATA, 1997 regarding anti State activities. It is amazing to note that after registration of F.I.R a Joint Investigation Team was constituted to investigate the matter but JIT could not race out the accused for about two years. No plausible explanation is available on record to justify delay in concluding the investigation. Record further shows that SIM from which appellant allegedly made obnoxious call was in the name of Qaiser Iqbal brother of Zafar Iqbal who appeared before the trial Court as PW-4. He stated ' that appellant received Rs, 3,50,000/- for sending his brother Qaiser Iqbal abroad alongwith his CNIC. However, he could not fulfill his promise and ultimately through intervention of Tunchayat' returned Rs, 2,00,000/-. During cross-examination this witness not only massively deviated from his previous statement got recorded under Section 161, Cr.P.C. but also admitted that accused was his relative. PW-8 Bashir Ahmed, Inspector was one of the members of JIT who conducted investigation of this case. In cross-examination he stated that he did not investigate as to what was the actual amount due towards the accused Muhammad Ishaq (present appellant). However, he stated that father of PW-4 Zafar Iqbal made application to the S.H.0., Police Station Chehlyak for recovery of Rs, 2,00,000/- from accused Ishaq. This fact negates the version of PW-4 that appellant. received Rs, 3,50,000/-. In the backdrop of above noted facts testimony of prosecution witnesses was un-reliable.
11. Position taken by the appellant in defence was that Qaiser Iqbal was his friend who abducted a girl before registration of instant case. As his was against this act so he managed to return the aforesaid lady to her father. Qaiser Iqbal got annoyed and later on involved him in this case falsely.
This fact was not denied by PW-4 Zafar Iqbal while appearing before the Court who in cross- examination admitted that a girl was abducted by his brother Qaiser Iqbal. Even I.O. fortified this fact. He stated that during investigation it came into his knowledge that Qaiser Iqbal abducted a girl from Basti Malook prior to the registration of instant F.I.R., however, he did not investigate that matter. In this scenario, if the versions of both sides are put in juxta position the stance taken by the defence appears to be more plausible. On re-appraisal of evidence we have come to the conclusion that prosecution has failed to prove charge against the appellant. Reluctantly, this criminal appeal is allowed. The conviction and sentence of the appellants is set aside. He is acquitted of the charges. He shall be released from jail forthwith if not required in any other case.