The accused has been charged .With the offence under section 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 for having been found in possession of seven Dynamite sticks, Safety fuse 6 meters in length and four Detonators: He has pleaded not guilty of the offence he has beer charged with.
2. On 4th December, 1979 Mr. Habib Ullah Khan, Assistant Sub---Inspector, Anti-Burglary staff was posted at Civil Lines, Karachi. Or the above date be was on his usual patrol duty to round up the miscreant who had escaped from Jail. At about 11.30a.m. He cached Army Workshop No. 602 situated in Jat Lines, Karachi, where he found a white 'Mazda' car passing by. He stopped the car as he suspected some mischief. The car was being driven by the present accused Abdul Ahad. There was one another person by name of Abbas also sitting in the car.
3. The case of the prosecution is that Mr.-Habibullah Khan searched the persons of the accused and his companion and found both of them armed with revolvers, for which they had no licence.
Mr. Habibullah, Khan, therefore, registered cases under section 13-D of the Arms Ordinance against the present accused and his companion. He further interrogated accused Abdul Abad and it is alleged that Abdul Ahad agreed to produce certain explosive substances which were lying in his house in Qtiaidabad. Mr. Habibullah Khan went to the house of the accused alongwith Mashirs Allah Rakha and Mashooq Hussain. This house belonged to Iqbal Shah but it was on rent with the accused: It Is alleged that the accused brought seven Dynamite sticks, Safety fuse vrires and four Detonators, which were buried in the courtyard of his house and produced the same before Mr. Habibullah Khan. After securing these articles. Mr. Habibullah Khan registered another case under section 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 and after usual investigation sent up the case before this Court for trial.
4. The case of the accused is that the Police had taken him to his house, but nothing was secured from there nor he had produced anything before Mr. Habibullah Khan A. S. I. He further stated that .The witnesses had deposed against him due to influence of one Iqbal Shah with whom he has enmity. Iqbal Shah is friendly with the Police and he has got him involved in this case.
5. In support of the prosecution case following witnesses have been, examined :- Quaidabab P. S.Exh. 6.
(3) Ashfaq ShaikhExh. 12.
(4) Bismillah KhanExh. 13.
(5) Rashid KhanExh. 14, and The accused has examined his mother Mst. Mehmooda Begum (Exh. 20) as defence witness.
6. Mr. Habibullah Khan A. S.-I. Has given the prosecution story as stated above and has deposed that the accused had voluntarily led him, alongwith Mashirs Allah Rakha and Mashooq Hussain Shah, to his house and produced the aforementioned explosive articles. Mashir Allah Rakha has been given up by the learned Special Public Prosecutor, while P. W . Mashooq Hussain Shah has not supported Mr. Habibullah Khan at all. He has denied that any house was pointed out by the accused or that the explosive articles were recovered from the house of the accused or at the instance of the accused. He has also denied that any Mashirnama of securing the articles was prepared on the spot. On the contrary he says that he was called to the Police Station later and asked to put his signature on a Mashirnama.
7. Other witnesses are formal being the Expert, who had examined the explosives, the S. H. O. Who had simply recorded the F. I. R. Of Mr. Habibullah and some witnesses on the point that the house is question which was on rent with accused, belonged to Iqbal Shah.
8. It is thus clear that there is bare word of A. S.-I. Mr. Habibullah Khan in support of the prosecution case. There is no corroboration of his evidence. Moreover his evidence suffers from some infirmities due to which it cannot be accepted without corroboration. In the first place it is not believable that the accused should have voluntarily admitted that dangerous explosive materials were lying buried in his house. Again the house from which the accused is said to have brought the explosive articles has not been proved to be in exclusive possession of the accused. The mother of the accused also resided there. There is no evidence to the effect that other persons had no access to the house. The articles produced before the Court do not show any signs of being dug out from the ground. If they had been buried underground, then the articles must have been smeared with dust, but no such signs were apparent on the articles.
9. The accused has produced his old mother in defence, who has stated that the Police bad taken thorough search of her house, but nothing was secured from there. This statement is supported by Mashooq Hussain Shah, the independent mashir, who has said that the explosive articles were already with the police when be had reached the spot and that even the Mashirnama was not prepared at the spot.
10. These inconsistencies and infirmities in the prosecution evidence make the case against the accused quite doubtful. Mr. Muhammad Ibrahim Memon also concedes that in view of the only Mashir examined in the case having turned hostile, the prosecution case has become doubtful.
For the above reasons, I give benefit of doubt to accused Abdul Aha find not guilty of the offence be has been charged with and acquit him. I shall be set at large, if not required in any other case. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.