RAJA AFRASIAB KHAN, J.-- The appellant, Ijaz Ahmed son of Muhammad Khan, caste Jat, resident of Mohallah Abdullahpur, Police Station, City, Gojra, District Faisalabad, was tried by the learned Special Court No. IV, Suppression of Terrorist Activities, Lahore, for possessing an illicit Kalashnikov loaded with 25 bullets and 4 magazines containing 25 bullets each and also I0O spare bullets. He was, accordingly convicted and sentenced to suffer 7 years R.I. Plus a fine of Rs. 30,000/- or in default thereof to undergo R.I. For one year on 25.10.1991, by the learned trial Judge. The appellant has challenged his conviction and sentence by filing this appeal before this Court which shall be decided through this judgment.
2. Shortly stated the facts are that on 27.3.1991, Habib Ali. ASI, and Arshad Ali. ASI were present near Octroi Post No. 9, Okara, when they received a wireless message disclosing that an offence of dacoity was committed within the- area of Police Station, Bhai Pheru and the accused in the said case were coming towards Okara side in car No. 125-175 TOYOTA COROLLA. The police party, thus, chased the said car of the accused which met an accident in front of Bokhari Hotel. They immediately reached the place of accident. The accused Ijaz Ahmad and others were brought out of the car. The accused was found in possession of Kalashnikov PI, 25 bullets P2/1-25, 4 Magazines P3/1-4 containing 25 bullets each and also I0O spare bullets which were taken into possession by the police party. The accused failed to produce any licence to keep the weapon. The complaint Ex- PA was sent to the Police Station for registration of a case against the accused. The prosecution in order to prove its case, produced Muhammad Ashraf. H.C. PW1. Habib Ali SI PW2 and Ali Muhammad ASI PW3. Muhammad Ashraf PW 1 recorded the formal FIR Ex.PA/1 on the complaint Ex.PA. PW2 and PW3 are the witnesses of the illicit recovery of the weapon.
3. The appellant denied the allegations levelled against him in his statement under section 342 Cr.P.C. He deposed that he was a friend of Rana Akram Rabbani and Shafqat Abbass. Both are the Members of Provincial Assembly of Punjab. His plea was that because of his friendship with the said members of the Assembly, he was falsely implicated in the case. He also stated that Rana Akram Rabbani made a complaint against Ali Muhammad ASI before the S.P., Okara about his misconduct. The appellant produced Mazhar Ali. HC DW 1 and Haji Muhammad Iqbal DW 2 in support of his plea.
4. The learned counsel contends with vehemence that the prosecution did not produce any witness from the public in support of its case. According to him, no reliance can be placed on the evidence of police officers alone who are definitely interested witnesses. Learned State counsel defended the conviction and sentence by adopting the reasons given in the judgment.
5. We have heard the learned counsel at considerable length. We have also read the whole-record with their assistance carefully. We do not find any substance in the contentions of the learned counsel for the appellant. It is. Mentioned in the evidence of PW2 and PW3 that the appellant was hotly chased by them and that his car met an accident in front of Bokhari Hotel because it was being driven rashly. The appellant was caught redhanded alongwith the Kalashnikov and ammunition at the spot by the police party. He was also injured in the said accident. The appellant was unable to produce any licence to keep the weapon with him. It was a night time occurrence.
The objection that the prosecution failed to produce public witnesses to attest the recovery is wholly devoid of force inasmuch as at such an odd hours of the night, there was no public witness available to attest the recovery proceedings. It is now well settled that the members of the police force are good and reliable like other witnesses. There is absolutely no evidence to show any animus of the police with the appellant. The defence version appears to be a mere concoction and as such it did not fit in the facts and circumstances of this case. We have been persuaded to believe the prosecution version. The recovery of kalashnikov and bullets from the possession of the appellant at the mid of night was proved beyond any shadow of doubt by reliable witnesses. The conviction of the appellant is thus upheld. However, in our considered view, the sentence imposed upon .The appellant was harsh and as such it is reduced from 7 years to 3 years R.I. In the peculiar circumstances of this case. The amount of fine is also reduced by 50%. The benefit of section 382-B Cr.P.C., shall also be extended to the appellant. With this modification in the sentence, there is no substance in the appeal which is hereby dismissed.