' MUHAMMAD ASHRAF LEGHARI, J.----The appellants have challenged the validity of impugned judgment, dated 10-8-1999 passed by Judge Anti-Terrorism Court No,1, Karachi in Special Case No,255 of 1999 being the leading cases of the two 256 and 257 of 1999 after being amalgamated by the trial Court.
2. The brief prosecution story of the main case as stated by complainant Naveed Hussain is that on 16-6-1999 he proceeded in his Car bearing No, QAG 3138 to Grace Video Centre, Block 13-D, Gulshan-e-Iqbal, Karachi for changing cassettes. At about 10-30 p.m. Three bandit boys robbed his car on pistol point Naveed Hussain informed the police on telephone No,134 and thereafter, lodged First Information Report at Gulshan-e-Iqbal Police Station being F.I.R. No,329 of 1999.
3. On the next day A.S.-I. Asghar Ali of Korangi Industrial Area Police Station along with his staff was on mobile and when reached near Tanzeem Flour Mill, Sector 27 at about 1-20 p.m. They noticed a Suzuki Car coming from a street side. The police raised a signal to stop it but the driver tried to escape by accelerating its speed. The police chased the car but the persons boarded therein, opened fire at the police personnel. The police fired in exchange. During this crossfire, the car dashed with the cemented plate-form and stopped there. The police surrounded the car and intercepted two persons sitting therein. One passer by Muhammad Ilyas was called and accused were interrogated. They introduced themselves to be Shoukat who was driving the car and another was Nadeem alias Naseem. On their personal search one pistol containing two live bullets were secured from the possession of accused Nadeem and one identity card, driving licence and cash of Rs,75 were secured from accused Shoukat. The police secured damaged car. The accused were taken under arrest and the articles 'were sealed under the Mashirnama signed by above said Mashirs Ilyas and P.C. Asif. The accused and the property were taken to police station. However, damaged car was left under the custody of constable. A.S.-I. Ashgar lodged the report under section 353/186/34, P.P.C. Being Crime No,164 of 1999 of Police Station Korangi Industrial Area.
Separate F.I.R. Bearing No,165/99 was registered under section 13-D, Arms Ordinance against accused Nadeem Qasim Naseem.
4. S.H.O. Abdul Hakeem Bangash investigated the aforesaid two cases. He visited Vardat pointed out by A.S.-I. Asghar Ali. He secured 3 empties bullets and 2 empties bullet shells of SMG in presence of Mashirs. He also recorded the statement of P.Ws. On 19-6-1999. He sent above said articles to ballistic expert. He submitted the challan of above said two cases after the investigation was complete.
5. S.I.P. Nadeem investigated the earlier crime of robber bearing No, 329 of 1999 of Police Station, Gulshan-e-Iqbal. After the arrest of accused they were taken into custody by Gulshan-e-lqbal Police and were produced before Magistrate for identification test through P.Ws. Naveed Hussain and Hamid Hussain. Both of them picked up the two accused. They perfectly identified the accused to be the same who had snatched the car from Naveed Hussain on pistol point. Subsequently the abovementioned 3 cases were amalgamated as the same were the result of same transaction.
6. At the trial the prosecution examined P.W. 1 Ali Ahmed Wagan, Judicial Magistrate. Exh.13, P.W.2 Hamid Hussain, Exh. 20, P.W.3 Ilyas Durani, Exh.21 P.W.4 A.S.-I. Asghar Ali Exh.24, P.W.5 S.H.O. Abdul Hakeem Bangsh, Exh.27 P.W.6 Muhammad Javed, Exh.30, P.W.7 Naveed Hussain, Exh.31 and P.W.8, S.I.P. Nadeem Exh .34 .
7. At the conclusion of trial the accused were found guilty and were awarded sentence R.I. For 10 years and fine of Rs,25,000 each under section 391/34, P.P.C. And in default of payment they had to undergo R.I.' for two years more. Accused Muhammad Nadeem alias Naseem was also sentenced to suffer R.I. For 10 years and same fine under section 324, P.P.C. Both the accused are convicted under section 7(1)(b) of Anti-Terrorism Act and sentenced to suffer R.I. For life and same fine.
Accused Muhammad Nadeem alias Nasim was sentenced to suffer R.I. For 7 years and fine of Rs,10,000 under section 13-D, Arms Ordinance and in default of payment he has to undergo one year R.I. The accused are further directed to pay Rs,50,000 as compensation to complainant under section 544-A, in default thereof they have to suffer R.I. 6 months more.
8. Mr. M.M. Kazi learned counsel for the appellants is not well and has filed his written arguments.
We have gone through the said arguments, wherein it is urged that the .Names of the culprits were not mentioned in the F,I.R. Nor their description and features were given. It is further urged that F.I.R.
Is delayed by about 2 hours and the identification test suffers from legal infirmities and illegalities.
The learned counsel has further asserted that the recovery of robbed car and the alleged pistol from one of the appellants are doubtful and no encounter took place in-between culprits and police. 'There is no mention of recovery of empties from the scene of offence, in the F.I.R. It is further pleaded that conviction under section 7(1)(b) of the Act is not warranted under the law as the provisions of section 6 of the Act were not attracted to the facts of the case. The learned counsel placed reliance on PLD 1995 SC 1, PLD 1962 Kar. 800, PLD 1964 Lahore 2, PLD 1976 SC 578, PLD 1964 Kar. 428 and 1999 M LD 3236.
9. Mr. S. Jalil A. Hashmi has supported the impugned judgment and argued that the complainant Naveed Hussain had no enmity with the accused. The concerned police, recovered the robbed car from appellant had also no reason to falsely implicate the accused. He further submitted that the prosecution has proved its case beyond any reasonable doubt and the sentence has rightly been awarded by the trial Court.
10. The perusal of record shows that a car was robbed from complainant Naveed Hussain on 16-6- 1999 at about 10-30 p.m. On pistol point, when he had gone to Grace Video Centre, Block 13-B, Gulshan-e-Iqbal, Karachi for exchanging cassettes. The shopkeeper Hamid Hussain of said shop has supported the version of complainant. After the arrest of accused they were put to identification test. The said Hamid Hussain deposed that he had seen the culprits and the car was parked from him at a distance of about 10/12 passes. Both the witnesses had ample opportunity to see the accused. The accused were put to identification test on 19-6-1999 before Judicial Magistrate which was held through complainant Navid Hussain and Hamid Hussain. The accused were mixed up with 20 dummies and they were rightly picked up by the two witnesses. This fact is corroborated by Judicial Magistrate Ali Ahmed Megan who was examined as Exh.13. The testimony of complainant Navid Hussain and Hamid Hussain and the Magistrate reveals that the culprits were rightly identified by the witnesses, who had absolutely no reason to involve the accused falsely. The version of complainant is further corroborated by P,W, Muhammad Javeed who was examined as Exh.30 to whom the complainant had narrated about the facts of robbery immediately after the incident.
11. The next incident had taken place on the other day of robbery i,e, 17-6-1999 when the culprits were seen going in robbed vehicle and were chased by police, At this point the prosecution has examined Mashir Muhammad Ilyas, A.S.-I. Asghar Ali and Inspector S.H.O. Abdul Hakeem.
12. The witnesses have supported the recovery of car and aforesaid articles. Similarly A.S.-I. Asghar Ali, Inspector/ S.H.O. Abdul Hakeem have supported the case of prosecution on the point of recovery, exchange of firing between the police and the bandits.
13. The case-law cited by the learned counsel for appellants has no applicability to the facts and circumstances of instant case.
14. The scrutiny of the case indicates that the accused were not previously known to the complainant Naveed Hussain and Ahmed Hussain and they have fully supported their case and implicated them in the robbery of car. Both of them identified the accused in test as well as in Court. The said witnesses and the police and Mashir Muhammad Ilyas had no reason to implicate the accused in false case. On the facts of case and the evidence adduced by the prosecution it appears that the prosecution has been able to bring home the guilt of accused and there is no discrepancy in the testimonies of witnesses. However, on the quantum of sentence we find that in a robbery case the sentence awarded by trial Court under section 7(1)(b) for imprisonment for life is too harsh and it would meet the ends of justice if the above sentence is reduced to 14 years R.I. The remaining sentences awarded under other sections are appropriate.
15. With this modification, this Anti-Terrorism Appeal No,113 of 1999 is hereby dismissed.