MUHAMMAD MUNIR KHAN, J.--- This Criminal Appeal No.-T68 of 1990 arises from the judgment of Presiding Officer, Special Court (Suppression of Terrorist Activities), Lahore, whereby he, on 16-6- 1990 convicted Nasir alias Irshad, appellant, under section 13 of the Arms Ordinance, 1965, and sentenced him to seven years' R.I. And a fine of Rs.20,000 or in default thereof 1-1/2 years' R.I.
2 The charge against the appellant was/is of keeping unlicensed mauser on 26-3-1989. He denied the charge and claimed to be tried.
3. To prove its case, the prosecution produced four witnesses. Muhammad Ishaq, A.S.I. P.W.1, had recorded the formal F.I.R. Exh.P.B. Rana Muhammad Aslam, P.W.2, stated that on 26-3-1989 he had apprehended the appellant near a graveyard, Garibabad and recovered mauser P.1 and cartridges P.2/1-8 from the fold of his Shalwar, which were taken into possession vide memo. P.C. Muhammad lqbal, P.W.3 is a public man. He did not support the prosecution case. Muhammad Ashraf. P.W.4, stated that the mauser and 8 cartriuges were recovered from the possession of appellant attested by nip;.
4. When examined under section 342, Cr.P.C. He denied the recovery of mauser from him. He produced Muhammad- Ashraf, D.W.1, and Ali Muhammad D.W.2 in defence.
5. Believing the prosecution case and disbelieving the plea of false implication raised by the appellant, the trial Court has convicted and sentenced him as stated above.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant has relied on Bukhtiar Ahmad's case 1991 P Cr. L J 2398 to contend that the trial of the appellant on the charge of keeping unlicensed mauser by the Special Court, was coram non judice. Learned counsel for the State is not in a position to controvert him.
7. We have examined the judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellant. We fully agree with the observations made therein and conclusion arrived at by the Division Bench of this Court.
8. Pursuant 'to the above discussion without discussing the merits of the case, we accept the appeal and set aside the conviction and sentence of the appellant. He shall be released forthwith, if not required to be detained in any other case. Needless to add the state would be well within the right to submit the challan against the appellant under the Arms Ordinance, 1965, before Illaqa Magistrate/Assistant Commissioner for ... Trial in accordance with law.
S.A./N-505/L