MUHAMMAD MUNIR KHAN, J.--- We propose to dispose of five Criminal Appeals Nos. 3'' of 1989, 33 of 1989, 34 of 1989, 91 of 1989 and 92 of 1959 filed by Meraj Din, Maqbool Ahmad, Muhammad Binyamin, Bashir Ahmad and Nazir Ahmad, respectively, through this single judgment.,
2. The aforesaid rive appellants were tried under section 13 of the Arms Ordinance, 1965 by Punjab Special Court for Speedy Trial, Faisalabad, on the charge of keeping unlicensed arms. On the conclusion of the trial, they were convicted under section 13 of the Arms Ordinance, 1965 and sentenced to 3 years' R.I. Each on 24-1-1989.
3. Since after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we feel inclined to accept these appeals and set aside the convictions and sentences of the appellants for want of jurisdiction of the trial Court to try them for offence under section 13 of the Arms Ordinance, so we need not set. Out the facts in detail and discuss the evidence. We find that the offence under section 13 of the Arms Ordinance, 1965, was neither a scheduled offence nor was committed in a transaction in which schedule offence was committed. So it was not triable under Special Courts for 'Speedy Trial Act, 1987.
For what has been said above, five appeals are accepted. The appellants are acquitted of the charge. They shall be released forthwith, if not required to be detained in some 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.