ALI BAIG, J. This Criminal Appeal has been directed against the impugned judgment/order dated 31.7.2017 passed by the learned Anti Terrorism Court Gilgit-Baltistan, whereby the learned trial Court has convicted the appellant/convict for the offences under Sections 324, 436, 427, 381, P.P.C. and under Sections 6/7 of ATA, 1997 and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for 5 months 23 days and the convi ct/ appellant was also convicted under Section 13 Arms Ordinance, 1965 and sentenced him to pay Rs. 5000/-.
2. The brief facts leading to filing of the instant appeal are that on 02-08-2017 complainant namely Abdul Majid son of Haji Abdul W ahid submitted written report to SHO Police Station Jutail Gilgit stating therein that:- "I have been posted as Deputy Director Coordination NAB Rawalpindi Sub-Of fice, Gilgit-Baltistan and residing in Sami Muhallah , Jutial, Gilgit. Today on 08-02-2017 at about 0710 hours in morning , I was sleeping in my bedroom, suddenly a voice of huge explosion was heard and firing was also being conducted. I immediately stood up and went towards TV lounge and in the meanwhile I saw a person opening fire towa rds the window of the bedroom from the lawn and also set the main door of T.V lounge on fire by pouring chemical on it. After this, I went towards the rare side of the house via kitchen and was scaling the wall and in the meanwhile voices of 2/3 persons in local language was heard and I saved my life by scaling the wall and entering the hous e of neighbor Att-ul-Haq. In my house, my servants Abdur Rehman alias Wahid and Abdul Qadir were also present. Otherwise, I have no acrimony or enmity with anyone however , the high level corruption matters are underway in which I am performing duties as Deputy Director Coordination. I and the Director were receiving the indirect threats of severe consequences from the accused involved in the cases under investigation. I have been attacked by the attackers on the instigation of other abetting accused. Therefore, it is requested legal action may be taken against the unknown terrorists."
3. "On receipt of the aforesaid written complaint the SHO Police Station Jutial registered FIR Exh. PW 4/A under Sections 324, 506(1 1), 436, 452, 427/109/34, P .P.C. and under Sections 6/7 of ATA, 1997."
4. After registration of afore said FIR the investigation of the instant case was assigned to investigation wing Gilgit.
The JIT conducted investigation and after completion of usual investigation, complete challan Exh. PW-9/A was submitted in the Anti Terrorism Court No.1 Gilgit Baltistan on 22-02-2017 again st the present appellant/convict namely Abdul Rahman alias W ahid.
5. On receipt of complete challan the learned trial Court summoned accused/appellant and special prosecutor and on completion of attendance of parties the learned trial Court framed charge against the appellant/convict on 13-3- 2017 wherein the appellant/convict pleaded not guilty and opted to contest the case.
6. Accordingly the learned trial Court summoned the PWs. In order to prove it's case the prosecution has produced and examined as many as 9 PWs. in the trial Court and thereafter the Special Prosecutor A.T.C. closed prosecution evidence. After closing of prosecution evidence learned trial Court examined the appellants under section 342, Cr.P.C. wherein the appellant/convict denied the allegation levelled against him and professed his innocence. The appellant/convict did not record his statement under Section 340(2), Cr.P.C. nor the appellant produced any defence witnesses in disproof of charge levelled against him.
7. It is pertinent to mentioned here that on completion of trial of his case, the appellant/convict submitted an application under Section 265-K, Cr .P.C. and prayed as under:- "It is therefore, humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to accept the petition and release the petitioner/ accused by taking lenient view and taking in to consideration the detention period as conviction and sentence to meet the ends of justice and equity ."
8. The learned Trial Court after hearing arguments on the aforesaid application has allowed the application of convict/appellant vide the impugned judgment dated 31-7-2017. We would like to re-produce the concluding Para of the impugned judgment passed by the learned trial Court as under:- "Keeping in view the above quoted case law and also keeping in view the request made by the learned counsel for the accused as well as the no objection made by the learned Public Prosecutor , I deem it just and proper to allow the petition filed by the accused under section 265-K, Cr .P.C. on compassionate and humanitarian grounds.
Hence, the application under section 265-K, Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed and the accused Abdur Rehman alias Wahid is hereby convicted under the charges levelled against him and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for 5 month and 23 days. I also hereby convict accused Abdur Rehman alias Wahid under section 13 A.O. and sentenced him to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/ (Rupees five thousand only) to be deposit ed in the Government Treasury .
In default thereof, the accused to suffer imprisonment for a term of two months. The weapon of offence Pistol 30 bore bearing NO. 5233 MADE CHINA SPECIAL MODIFIED CAL 30 BORE and another 30 bore pistol bearing No. D3947 CHINA SPOR TS SPECIAL CAL 30 BORE recovered from the accused are hereby confiscated in favour of the State."
9. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record with their able assistance.
10. From perusal of record it transpires that the learned trial Court has convicted the appellant/convict on his own request which was made in his application filed under Section 265-K, Cr.P.C. and by taking lenient view the lesser punishment of imprisonment for a period 5 months and 23 days which the appellant/convict had already undergone along with a fine of Rs. 5000/- was awarded to the appellant/convict vide the impug ned judgment dated 31-7-2017.
The learned trial Court has already allowed the application of the applicant/ convict but it is astonishing to note that after taking relief from the learned trial Court the appellant/convict has filed the instant appeal before this Court by concealing the fact that the lesser punishment was awarded to the appellant on his own request. Hence the appellant/convict is estopped by his conduct and admission to file the instant appeal, thus the instant criminal appeal is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed on the aforesaid circumstances.
11. For what has been discussed above, we do not find any reason to interfere with the conviction and sentence awarded to the appellant/convict by the learned trial Court. Consequently the instant criminal appeal is not maintainable and is hereby dismissed being devoid of merits. Moreover , the learned counsel for the appellants has also failed to point out any material irregularity and illegality or infirmity in the case of prosecution warranting interference by this Court. Announced .