' SYED DEEDAR HUSSAIN SHAH, J.---These appeals by leave of the Court are directed against the judgment, dated 17-8-1999, of the High Court of Sindh, Karachi, passed in Special Anti-Terrorism Appeal No,19 of 1999.
2. Briefly stated the case of the prosecution is that on 12-8-1998 complainant Aftab Alam's nephew Master Faisal Khursheed, aged 5 years, student of KG-II in Progressive National Ideal Public School, had gone to school as usual. At about 12-30 p.m. His mother Mst. Yasmeen came to school to pick up her son, but Chowkidar told her that at about 12-20 p.m. One girl had taken away the boy.
Thereafter, she came back to home and brought the matter to the notice of the complainant, who and his entire family started searching the boy, but all in vain. On the same day at about 2.30 p.m.
One unknown lady telephoned and informed that the boy was kept with them and she demanded Rs,3,00,000 as ransom for his release. Afterwards the complainant lodged a report with the police.
The telephone number of the complainant vis. 6311993 was kept under observation and it transpired that the telephone calls were being made by the callers from telephone booth.
Hafizullah Shah, S.-I. And other police officials under the supervision of S.D.M., Jamshed Quarters stood at some distance from telephone booth and at about 6-10 p.m. a man alongwith a woman came to the telephone booth. The police caught hold of them and from their search a written chit having Telephone No,6311993 was recovered from the pocket of Asim Aziz co- accused. They admitted that the abducted boy was in their custody at their home. The police party alongwith the S.D.M. Reached the house and recovered boy Faisal and arrested Azizul Hassan, Asim Aziz and Mst.
Nasreen Jamal. The acquitted accused Muhammad Meraj was arrested on 15-8-1998, whereas Mst. Sadaf was arrested on 18-8-1998.
3. After usual investigation the challan was submitted before the Court of Special Judge Anti- Terrorsim, Karachi, from where it was sent to the Military Court. The Military Court convicted them but pending the execution of the sentence the Military Courts were wound up pursuant to the judgment of this Court in the case of Liaqat Hussain (PLD 1999 SC 504). The case was transferred to the Court of Special Judge for Anti-Terrorism, Karachi Division. The said Court vide judgment dated 8-5-1999 acquitted Muhammad Meraj and convicted the remaining accused under section 365- A/34, P.P.C. Sadaf appellant and Asim Aziz were sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs,50,000 each, or in default one year R.I. And the appellant Nasreen Jamal and Azizul Hassan were sentenced to 10 years' R.I. And fine of Rs,50,000 each, or one years' R.I. In default. Benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Was extended to all the accused.
4. The convicts assailed their conviction and sentence through appeal. The learned High Court vide judgment dated 17-8-1999 accepted the appeal to the extent of Azizul Hassan, who was acquitted, and not only dismissed the same vis-a-vis the remaining convicts but the sentence of Mst.
Nasreen Jamal was also enhanced to imprisonment for life and the sentence of fine was substituted by an order of forfeiture of the movable and immovable properties of the appellants.
5. Leave to appeal was granted in respect of appellant Sadaf. The petition qua Nasreen Jamal appellant was to be treated as a direct appeal.
6. Ch. Muhammad Akram, learned counsel for the appellants, inter alia, contended that the prosecution evidence so produced is not trustworthy and should not had been relied upon by the Courts below; that the Courts below had not considered the evidence in its proper perspective and the impugned judgment is based on conjectures and surmises.
7. Mr. Suleman Habibullab, learned Additional Advocate-General controverted the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellants and submitted that the learned High Court has considered the entire evidence thoroughly and the impugned judgment is based on sound and cogent reasons, which does not call for interference.
8. We have considered the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties and have minutely gone through the evidence. Admittedly Mst. Sadaf had come to the school and took away abductee Faisal, Munawar Ahmad (P.W.) Security Guard/Administrator had rightly identified her.
The P.W. Had also produced the bio-data of appellant Sadaf, upon which her photograph was affixed, to Sub-Inspector Hafizullah pointing out to him that she was the lady who abducted the boy. It is further in evidence that Sadaf confined Faisal in the house of her mother Mst. Nasreen Jamal, whereas the police arrested Azizul Hassan, Asim Aziz and Nasreen Jamal from the telephone booth from where they were making call to the complainant for ransom amount for the release of boy Faisal. Subsequently, on their pointation Faisal was recovered from their house. The prosecution provided sufficient evidence before the Court, which was duly considered, examined and relied upon by the Courts below. The High Court after considering all aspects of the case disposed of the appeal with the following observations:- "25. From what has been discussed above, we are of the considered view that not only factum of abduction has been established in this case, but it has been proved beyond any shadow of doubt that boy Master Faisal Khursheed was abducted by appellant Sadaf and was detained in the house of her mother, appellant Mst. Nasreen Jamal. The factum of demand of ransom amount for the release of abductee by appellant Mst. Nasreen Jarnal and Asim Aziz stand proved not only from the fact that they were arrested while making telephone call for such demand at the telephone booth, but a chit containing telephone number of the complainant was also recovered from them.
Irrespective of this, they led to the recovery of abductee from their house in presence of above mentioned witnesses, with whom they did not suggest any enmity. Though their counsel had cross-examined all the abovementioned witnesses, but could not shatter their evidence, as such there is no hesitation in holding them guilty of the offence. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that co-accused Muhammad Meraj was acquitted by the trial Court on same evidence, the benefit of which should also be extended in favour of the appellants, is devoid of force as none of the prosecution witnesses has implicated him with the commission of offence.
26. Accordingly while dismissing their appeal, we maintain the conviction and sentence of appellants Asim Aziz and Miss Sadaf, whereas enhance the sentence against appellant Nasreen Jamal to imprisonment for life. We also order the forfeiture of their movable as well as immovable properties as the sentence of fine awarded to them by the trial Court was not proper."
9. We further found that the learned High Court had considered the case in its proper perspective, which is based on the principles laid down by the superior Courts. There is no misreading or non- reading of evidence or misconstruction of law. The appeal being devoid of merit and substance is dismissed and the impugned judgment is maintained.