Petitioner Muhammad Aslam Khan has challenged the propriety of registration of a case F.I.R. No. 114, dated 12-11-1990 (Annexure `F) by moving this Constitutional petition before this Court. Briefly stated the facts are that 7.62 mm automatic rifle bearing No.57133 commonly known as Klashnikov was recovered by Muhammad Ali Inspector, S.H.O. Police Station Kalabagh District Mianwali on 12- 11-1990 from the possession of the petitioner when he was travelling in his car. According to the prosecution petitioner was unable to show his licence for keeping the aforesaid weapon with him.
In this view of the matter aforesaid case was registered against the petitioner on the statement of the Police Officer under section 13-B of the Arms Ordinance, 1965 on 12-11-1990.
2. Learned counsel contends that petitioner has a valid licence of the weapon and as such he has committed no offence. Learned counsel has drawn my attention to Annexure `J' memorandum issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Peshawar on 9-2-1991 showing that petitioner did produce licence bearing No.85007/90 before him. The licence was also verified by the Investigating Officer and he found the entry of the said weapon duly made in the register. Mr. Farooq Bedar, learned Additional Advocate-General after consulting the record states that petitioner has licence of the weapon mentioned above. Sher Khan, A.S.I. Is also present with record of the case. He too states that petitioner possesses licence of the weapon recovered from his possession.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have persued the record. The perusal of the record shows beyond any shadow of doubt that petitioner was keeping the Klashnikov with him on the authority of a licence having been issued to him by the Government of Pakistan. Even the Police Officer concedes that the petitioner is a licensee of the weapon in question and as such was competent to keep it with him. In view of the documentary evidence available on record, learned Law Officer does not oppose the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. In consequence the proceedings of the case F.I.R. No.114 dated 12-11-1990 (Annexure `F) are abuse of the process of the Court and as such the same are quashed being without lawful authority and of no legal consequence. Accordingly, the petition succeeds and is allowed to this extent.