IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Special Criminal A.T. Appeal
No.12 of 2012
Mr.
Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto
Mr. Justice Rasheed Ahmed Soomro
Appellant : Junaid Waheed
son of Muhammad Waheed
Respondent : The State through Mr. Muhammad Iqbal Awan,
DPG.
Date of Hearing : 18.08.2017
Date of announcement : 18.08.2017
J U D G M E N T
Appellant
Junaid Waheed was tried by
learned Judge Anti-Terrorism Court No.II, Karachi in
Special Cases Nos.58 and 59 of 2011 by judgment dated 24th March,
2012. Appellant Junaid Waheed
was convicted 7(h) of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 and sentenced to five years R.I.
and under section 13(d) 03 years R.I. The trial Court looking to the financial
position of the accused, did not impose fine upon the appellant accused and
extended benefit of section 382-B Cr.P.C. to him.
Appellant filed the appeal against his conviction and sentence.
2. Facts of this case as well as evidence finds an elaborate mention in the judgment of trail court.
Hence, there is no need to repeat the same.
3. During pendency of appeal jail roll was
called. Jail roll dated 16.08.2017 is received from Senior Superintendent
Central Prison, Karachi which reflects that appellant Junaid
Waheed was convicted in Special Case Nos.58 and 59 of
2011 in Crime Nos.172 and 173 of 2011 registered at Police Station Mithadar for offences under section 386/34 PPC read with
section 7 ATA, 1997 and 13(d) Arms Ordinance and was admitted in Central Prison
after his conviction on 04.07.2011. Appellant in question has been released
from the Central Prison on 01.07.2015 by Superintendent Central Prison, Karachi
on expiry of sentence on remission system. After release of the appellant on
1.07.2015 he never appeared before this Court to contest his appeal on merits.
Intimation notice for today’s date of hearing was issued to Mr. Abdul Rasheed Pirzada counsel for the
appellant as reflected in the cause list but none appeared. With the assistance
of learned DPG we have perused the prosecution evidence as well as judgment of
the trial Court recorded on 24th March, 2012. The trial Court for
the sound reasons convicted and sentenced the appellants as stated above and
took lenient view, fine was not imposed upon him. In such circumstances, we
have no hesitation to hold that conviction and sentence recorded by the trial
Court require no interference by this Court. Since appellant
has been released from jail on the expiry of his sentence on the remission
basis. Therefore, in the above circumstances the appeal is dismissed.
J U D G E
J U D
G E
Farooq/*