Pakistan Case Lawโ† Search
1997 MLD 1238

ZAHID AKHTAR vs THE STATE

Citation1997 MLD 1238
CourtPeshawar High Court
Case No.Criminal Miscellaneous No. 711 of 1995
Date1996-04-16
Judge(s)Nasir-ul-Mulk
ResultBail allowed

The background in which this application for bail has been moved by Zahid Akhtar is that during investigation of case F.I.R. No. l dated 31-10-1992 registered at C.I.D. Establishment under section 124-A, P.P.C./16 M.P.O., it was disclosed by accused Muhammad Arif Qureshi, that in order to obtain arms for carrying out terrorist activities in Karachi, he, alongwith Sardar Khan and Syed Asghar Kazmi, had come down to Peshawar and had purchased huge quantity of arms and ammunitions from Darra Adam Khel, situated in the Tribal Territory. These arms and ammunitions were kept in the Afghan Refugee Camp at Badaber for further transportation to Karachi. The three accused who were being interrogated pointed out to the investigating agency the place where the arms and ammunitions were kept, from where they were recovered and a case under section 5, Explosive Substances Act/ section 13/13-A, Arms Ordinance read with section 120-B, P.P.C. Was registered on 29-5-1995 at CID Establishment vide F.I.R. No.4. On the same day during investigation the accused disclosed that the petitioner Zahid Akhtar had provided finances for the purchase of the arms and ammunitions. He was arrested at Islamabad Airport on 30-5-1995, and being declined bail by the Special Judge under the Suppression of Terrorist Activities, Peshawar, has now moved this Court for bail.

2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the only material against the petitioner is the confessional statement of the co-accused Syed Asghar Kazmi, recorded on 7-6- 1995 and that even in that statement no direct link between him and the petitioner has been claimed. Referring to Article 43 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, the learned counsel pointed out that the confessional statement of the co-accused can at best be circumstantial evidence to be taken into consideration against the accused. He relied upon 1989 PCr.LJ 112, PLD 1991 FSC 553 and 1992 PCr.LJ 357. He further submitted that there has been no order of remand by a competent Court for the continued detention of the petitioner after 18-6-1995 and, therefore, on that score too the detention of the petitioner is illegal, Reliance was placed on a judgment of this Court reported as 1992 PCr. LJ 1910.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the State contended that the petitioner had been implicated in the commission of offence by his co-accused and that the petitioner was arrested prior to the confessional statement when his complicity in the crime was disclosed by his co-accused.

4. The learned counsel conceded that the only material against the petitioner for his involvement in the crime is the confessional statement of co---accused Syed Asghar Kazmi. The other co- accused, Muhammad Arif Qureshi who had also made a confessional statement, has not implicated the petitioner. Therefore, for the purpose of disposing of this bail application only the confessional statement of Syed Asghar Kazmi is to be remained to determine the petitioner's prima facie complicity in the crime. Syed Asghar Kazmi had confessed that he was informed by Kamal Ahmad and Muhammad Ahmad, activist of MQM, that the finances for the purpose of arms and ammunitions would be provided by Zahid Akhtar Senator. But he further stated that Rs.1,45,000 were given to him by one Qamar Ahmad for the purchase of arms, which he took alongwith him for the purpose to Darra Adam Khel. There is no allegation in the confessional statement that the petitioner had either met the confessing accused or had provided any finances, or any other tacit or overt support to him or to any other accused in the case. This confessional statement alone does not furnish reasonable grounds to believe that the petitioner provided any finances or any other support for the purposes of purchase of the arms and ammunitions. The petitioner has, therefore, made out a case for the grant of bail. Consequently this application is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail provided he furnishes bail bonds in the sum of Rs. One tic with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Sessions Judge/Special Judge, Suppression of Terrorist Activities, Peshawar.

For educational and research use only โ€” not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
DisclaimerยทPrivacyยทTermsยทSearch