ZULFIQAR ALIAS JAPHA Versus THE STATE

RASHID AZIZ KHAN, J. --- Zulfiqar Ali was sent up for trial by Police Station Chung, Lahore, for an offence under section 13 of the Arms Ordinance, 1965. Special Court No.IV (Suppression of Terrorist Activities), Lahore, vide judgment, dated 28-4-1992 convicted and sentenced him under section 13 of the Ordinance to six years' R.I. with a fine of Rs.50,000, or in default to undergo further R.I. for one year. The convict has appealed. This judgment shall dispose of the same.

2. Prosecution story in brief, as disclosed in complaint Exh.PA. lodged by Muhammad Sharif, Inspector, P.W., was that on 31-1-1992 the first informant with a police contingent was going on an official vehicle in connection with the investigation of a case No.269 of 1990 under section 379, P.P.C. registered at Police Station Manga Mandi, Lahore. On the way they received secret information that Zulfiqar Ali appellant, resident of Police Station Chung was in possession of a Klashnikov. On receipt of the said information, the police party went to the Haveli of the appellant; on seeing the police party said Zulfiqar tried to escape but was apprehended. On interrogation, he got recovered Klashnikov alongwith a magazine containing 20 cartridges. Since he could not produce any licence, therefore, the present case.

3. Prosecution in support of its case produced four witnesses in all. P.W.1 Umar Hayat, A.S.I., received complaint Exh.PA. and registered formal F.I.R. Exh.PA./1. P.W.2 Mansab Ali, A.S.I., in January, 1992 was posted in C.I.A. Cantt., Lahore. On 31-1-1992, he alongwith other police officials was going to Manga Mandi in connection with investigation of a case. They received secret information, whereupon they apprehended Zulfiqar appellant from his Haveli, where he got recovered Klashnikov rifle P.1 with twenty bullets P.2/1-20, which was secured vide memo. Exh.P.B. The witness attested the said memo. P.W.3 Maqsood Hussain, A.S.I. was also posted in C.I.A. and was member of the party, which apprehended the appellant. P.W.4 Muhammad Sharif, Inspector, C.I.A., stated that on 31-1-1992 he was going to Manga Mandi in connection with investigation of a case when received secret information, whereupon he raided the Haveli of the appellant, who on interrogation got recovered Klashnikov P.1 with a magazine containing 20 bullets P.2/1-20, which were secured by him. Since the appellant could not produce any licence, therefore, the present case.

At the conclusion of the prosecution evidence, the appellant was examined without oath. He refuted the prosecution allegations and pleaded innocence. He stated that the case was registered against him on account of enmity with the Inspector. He also produced two D.Ws. D.W.1 Haji Ghulam Rasool was elder brother of the appellant. He stated that he knew Muhammad Sharif, Inspector for the last 15/16 years, who purchased a buffalo from him for Rs.15,000 in the year 1991 but did not pay the price. He sent Zulfiqar appellant for realization of the sale-price, which was taken ill by the said Inspector, therefore, the present case. D.W.2 Habib Ali Shah stated that he knew Zulfiqar appellant who was carrying on the business of sale and purchase of buffaloes. It was in his knowledge that the appellant had gone to Muhammad Sharif, Inspector for realization of the sale-price.

4. It was contended by learned counsel for the appellant that the case was the result of mala fides and ill-will. Argued that it was most strange that the entire raiding party belonged to C.I.A. Staff, Lahore, and none of them was either posted at Police Station Chung or they informed the concerned police station with regard to their visit. Argued that even otherwise, the recovery was effected from the Haveli of the appellant, which was situated inside the village, yet nobody from the said village was associated. The contentions were opposed by learned counsel for the State.

5. We have heard the learned counsel and gone through the evidence with his assistance. It is surprising to note that all the P.Ws. were posted in C.IA., Lahore. They were going in connection with an investigation of a case to Manga Mandi on an official vehicle, yet while going on the official vehicle they received secret information. None of the P.Ws. had stated that they stopped their vehicle on the way and met the people. It is of common knowledge that secret information is given only to those police officials who are known to the persons. Secret information is never imparted to strangers. There is no explanation why the secret information was not given to the Police Station, Chung within whose jurisdiction Haveli of the appellant was situated. There is no cogent explanation available why the P.Ws. did not go to the police station, associated any official from Chung Police Station or at least informed them that they were going to raid the house within their jurisdiction. The law on the subject is clear which has been flouted. This in itself makes the entire prosecution case highly doubtful. The circumstances in which the recovery has been effected are certainly most doubtful, Therefore, giving the benefit of doubt, we accept the appeal and set aside the conviction and sentence. The appellant shall be released forthwith if not required in any other case. ????????????

N.H.Q./Z-107/L ?????????

Appeal accepted.