1. GHULAM NABI SOOMRO, ]. - By this common order we propose to dispose of Criminal Revisions Nos.
2. 181, 146 and 165 to 174 of 2001.
3. The aforesaid Criminal Revisions have been preferred against the orders passed on different dates during the months of August and September, 2001, by the learned Anti- Terrorism Court No. III, whereby the -prayer of the applicants/accused for transfer of cases relating to vehicle snatching and criminal trespass (illegal Qabza) to the Court of Sessions was declined.
4. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that in view of Anti-Terrorism (Amendment)
5. Ordinance, 2001 (Ordinance XXXIX of 2001), promulgated on 14.8.2001, the offences involved in these revisions have been deleted and are no more triable under the Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), (hereinafter to be referred as the Act); hence the aforesaid cases are to be tried by a Court of Sessions or any other competent Court of law. It is, therefore, urged that the cases be transferred to the competent Court having jurisdiction as the same were covered by Section 39B(2)(e) of the Act.
6. Mr. Habib Ahmed learned AAG, has not controverted the above contentions.
7. Initially the cases of vehicle snatching and criminal trespass (illegal Qabza) were not offences triable by Anti-Terrorism Court. However, vide Ordinance TV of 1999, enforced on 27.4.1999 such offences were inserted in Section 7-A and were made punishable under Section 7-B. Later on vide amendment Ordinance No. XXIX of 2O0O, enforced on 24.7.2000, Sections 7-A and 7B were deleted and Section 6(d) was reconstituted wherein the above-said offences were made as substantive offences punishable under Section 7(111) of the Act.
8. However, on 14th August, 2001 several .Amendments were brought into the Act vide Ordinance XXXIX of 2001, where Section 6 of the Act was Completely substituted along with the schedule. It is pertinent to note that all offences covered by earlier Section 6(d) are not covered in new Section 6 as amended.
9. Vide sub-section (1) of the newly deserted Section 39B of the Act, the Suppression of Terrorist Activities Act, 1975 has been repealed. Sub-section (2) whereof deals with the cases of the repealed STA Act (XV of 1975) and the effect of amendment on the pending cases before the Anti- Terrorism Courts. It would be important here to reproduce Section 39B of the Act for convenience of perusal:-- "39B. Repeal and Savings. - (1) The Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) Act, 1975 (XV of 1975) is hereby repealed.
(2) Notwithstanding the repeal of the^ Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) Act, 1975 (XV of 1975) and the amendment of the Anti- Terrorism Act, 1997 (XXVII of 1997), by the Anti- Terrorism (Amendment) Ordinance, 200I:--
(a) every order, decision or judgment passed by any Anti-Terrorism Court constituted under this Act or ^Special Court constituted under the Suppression of Terrorists Activities (Special Courts) Act, 1975, or any Appellate Court before such repeal or amendment shall remain in force and operative and the repeal or amendment shall not affect the previous operation of the law or anything duly done or suffered or punishment incurred thereunder;
(b) every case, appeal ' and 4 legal proceedings whatsoever filed or pending before any Court under the Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) Act, 1975, including the High Court and the Supreme Court, shall continue to be proceeded with in accordance with law before the concerned Court of competent jurisdiction, including the Court established. Under this Act, and ail orders passed, decisions made and judgments delivered whether in the past or which may be made delivered hereafter by such concerned Court whether original, appellate or revisional, shall be deemed to have been validly and competently made;
(c) all convictions made, punishments or sentences awarded by the Anti-Terrorism Court or Special Court or an Appellate Court before such repeal or amendment shall be executed is if the said Acts were in force;
(d) any investigation or inquiry under this Act or the Suppression of Terrorists Activities (Special Courts) Act, 1975 made or instituted before the commencement of the Anti-Terrorism (Amendment) Ordinance, 2001, shall continue to be made and proceeded with in accordance with law;
(e) ail cases pending before the Anti-Terrorism Court or Special Court immediately before the commencement of the Anti-Terrorism (Amendment) Ordinance, 200I, if not covered by this Act or clauses (a) and (b) above, shall stand transferred to the respective Courts of Sessions of the area or such other Courts of competent jurisdiction where the cases were registered against the accused and such Courts shall proceed with the cases from the stage $t which they were pending, without the necessity of recalling any witnesses; and (f)...........
10. The perusal of the above provisions enunciates that; Clause (a) of sub-section (2) has saved ail actions, orders, decisions, and judgments passed under the Act of 1975 and the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997.
11. Clause (b) deals with legal proceedings filed or pending before any Court under the Act of 1975.1 Clause (c) is again saving clause relating to the punishment awarded in the cases.
12. Clause (d) saves the investigation.
13. Whereas Clause (e) speaks about the pending cases before STA Courts if not covered bv clauses
(a) and (b) above and the cases which were pending before Anti-Terrorism Courts and are not covered by the Act. Under this provision all such cases which were so pending are directed to be transferred to the respective Courts of Sessions of the area or such other Courts of competent jurisdiction. It further provides that such transferee Courts shall proceed with the -.Cases from the stage at which those cases are pending.
14. The interpretation given to clause (b) of sub-section (2) of said Section 39B, by the learned Trial Court, in the impugned orders 'is that, cases which are pending before the Anti-Terrorism Court even after the issuance of amending Ordinance, would be deemed to be pending before it, and further that such cases were triable by it.
15. Mr. Khawaja Naveed Ahmed learned Advocate invited our attention to order dated 1.9.2001 passed by the same Court in Spl. Case No. 331/01 whereby relying upon Section 39B(2)(e) of the Act, 1997 (as amended) transferred similar cases to the Court of Sessions.
16. It may be observed. That clause (b) deals only with pending cases under the Act of 1975 whereas clause (e) clearly lays down that the cases which arf not covered by this Act shall -stand transferred to the respective Courts, In our view the learned trial Court appears to be influenced by the words, "including the Court established under this Act" appearing in clause (b) of subjection (2) .Of Section 39B. The view taken by the Trial Court in its earlier order was correct.
17. Admittedly, the cases of vehicle snatching and Criminal Trespass (Illegal Qabza) after the amendment Ordinance, XXXIX of 2001, are not covered by Anti-Terrorism Act, therefore the same are no more triable by Anti-Terrorism Courts.
18. From perusal of the entire clause (b) supra It becomes clear that it deals only with the cases pending under the S.T.A. Act, 1975 before any Court at any stage including the Anti-Terrorism Act.
19. Resultantly we are of the view that the impugned orders are not in accordance with law. The cases after the amendment have been made triable by the Courts of Session or such other Courts of competent jurisdiction. The impugned orders are, therefore, set aside and the cases#are ordered to be transferred to the respective Sessions Courts for further proceedings in accordance with law.
20. The Revisions stand allowed.