HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Special Criminal Anti-Terrorism Appeals No. 29 & 30 of 2022

Present: Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto

Mr. Justice Shamsuddin Abbasi

Appellant : Nemo for appellant Kamran

Respondent : The State through Mr. Mohammad Iqbal Awan Additional Prosecutor General Sindh

Date of Hearing : 12.01.2023

Date of judgment : 12.01.2023

JUDGMENT

NAIMATULLAH PHULPOTO, J.- Kamran appellant was tried by learned Judge, Anti-Terrorism Court No. IV, Karachi in Special Cases No. 156 & 156-A of 2021. After full dressed trial, vide judgment dated 27.11.2021, appellant was convicted and sentenced as under:

i. Accused Kamran s/o Muhammad Punhal found guilty of the charges of offence u/s 5 of Explosive Substance Act, 1908. He is convicted and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for three year.

ii. Accused Kamran s/o Muhammad Punhal also found guilty of the charged offence punishable u/s 23(1)(a) of Sindh Arms Act 2013, is convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for three year with fine of Rs.5000/- (Rupees five thousand) in case of default in payment of fine, he shall further suffer imprisonment for one month.

All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Appellant was extended benefit of Section 382-B Cr.P.C.

2. Appellant filed two appeals against his conviction and sentence. Both the appeals have been admitted to regular hearing and notices were issued to Prosecutor General Sindh. During pendency of the appeals, jail roll was called. Jail roll dated 11.01.2023 shows that appellant has been released from the prison on 20.12.2022 on expiry of sentence on remission system in the aforesaid crimes/special cases. After release of the appellant from jail since 20.12.2022, appellant has not appeared before this Court to contest the appeals on merits. Mr. Muhammad Rehan advocate for the appellant is called absent since last two dates of hearings though the name of the appellant transpires in the cause list.

3. Mr. Muhammad Iqbal Awan, Addl. P.G submits that after release of the appellant, these appeals have become infructuous, but we are of the view that this Court has to satisfy itself whether prosecution had succeeded to prove its case and whether conviction awarded by the trial Court was warranted in law.

4. We have perused the impugned judgments. In para 21 reasons have been assigned by the learned trial Court for convicting the appellant. We have examined the reasons and evidence recorded in this case and have come to the conclusion that findings of guilt recorded by learned trial Court require no interference by this Court. Resultantly, the impugned conviction is maintained and appeals are dismissed.

JUDGE

JUDGE

..