' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.--The petitioners in these four petitions for special leave to appeal were separately tried by the Special Court for speedy trial of an offence under section 13, Arms Ordinance and were sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and fines of Rs,5,000. They filed appeals which were heard by a Division Bench in the High Court. The learned Division Bench maintained their convictions and sentences and dismissed the appeals after giving a direction that they should be given the benefit of Section 382-B, Criminal Procedure Code.
2. The case of the prosecution was that on the night between 9/10-7-1987 a police contingent was travelling by a wagon on the Jhang-Chiniot Road. When it reached Chamra Mor, it found the petitioners standing on the road side. The petitioners started running. The police party chased them and after covering some distance succeeded in capturing them. From each of the four petitioners carbines with live cartridges were recovered.
3. The petitioners pleaded not guilty at the trial. They denied that any fire-man was recovered from their possession and alleged that they had been falsely implicated.
4. The case against the petitioners was supported at the trial by a Sub-Inspector of the Police who was heading the Police party and one Saeed Ahmad. The trial Court as well as the High Court found their testimony credible and held the petitioners guilty.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners who has not been able to point out any infirmity in the findings of the High Court. So far as Bhalak petitioner is concerned, Saeed Ahmad did not in his statement mention the recovery of fire-arm from his possession. But then there is the testimony of S.1. Abdul Majid against him. There is no reason at all why S.I. Abdul Majid should have perjured himself against him. No case for interference by this Court has I been made out. The petitions are dismissed.