Pakistan Case Law
1989 P Cr. L J 1310

MUHAMMAD ASIF vs THE STATE

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1989 P Cr. L J 1310
CourtPeshawar High Court
Case No.Criminal Miscellaneous No, 193 of 1989
Date1989-04-08
Judge(s)Abdul Karim Khan Kundi
ResultBail granted
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This bail application arose from the arrest of the petitioner, Muhammad Asif, who was found in possession of a Kalashnikov rifle and charas. The petitioner sought bail after the Special Court refused his application, citing the Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) Act, 1975. The core legal question was whether the Special Court retained jurisdiction over the offence under the Arms Ordinance, 1965, following the expiration of Ordinances Nos. XVI and XVII of 1988. The Court held that the Ordinances, which had expanded the Special Court's jurisdiction to include offences under section 13-B of the Arms Ordinance, expired on February 13, 1989, as they were not passed by Parliament within the four-month period prescribed by Article 89 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. Consequently, the Special Court lacked jurisdiction at the time of the impugned order. The offence reverted to the normal sentencing regime, falling outside the restrictive bail provisions of section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Bail was granted, noting the recovery was witnessed only by police personnel during a prearranged raid.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Does a Special Court retain jurisdiction over an offence if the Ordinance conferring such jurisdiction expires before the court passes an order?
  • What is the effect of the expiration of an Ordinance promulgated under Article 89 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, if not passed by Parliament?
  • Does an offence under section 13 of the West Pakistan Arms Ordinance, 1965, fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Section 13, West Pakistan Arms Ordinance 1965
  • Articles 3/4, Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order 1979
  • Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) Act 1975
  • Section 8, West Pakistan Arms Ordinance 1965
  • Section 9, West Pakistan Arms Ordinance 1965
  • Section 10, West Pakistan Arms Ordinance 1965
  • Section 13-A, West Pakistan Arms Ordinance 1965
  • Section 13-B, West Pakistan Arms Ordinance 1965
  • Article 89, Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973
  • Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
post-arrest bailspecial court jurisdictionordinance expirationArms Ordinancestatutory interpretationpolice recovery

Vide F.I.R. No, 109, Police Station Daud Zai, dated 22-2-1989 it is stated that a mobile police party had on earlier information signalled Motor Car No, SW.5070 to stop at Naguman Chowk Check Post but the vehicle turned towards Charsadda and was overpowered after chase and Muhammad Asif the present accused was found in possession of a Kalashnikov rifle with charger containing five rounds besides 30 grams of Charas in his pocket and accordingly a case under section 13, Arms Ordinance and Articles 3/4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979 was registered against him. He is said to have been released on bail on charge under Articles 3/4 P.O. However, he was refused bail by the learned Judge, Special Court on charge under section 13, Arms Ordinance since the prosecution had succeeded to make out a prima facie case of going armed with unlicensed Kalashnikov rifle as recovered from his possession.

2. Now under the Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) Act, 1975 Special Court has the exclusive jurisdiction vis-a-vis the scheduled offences and that under paragraph (c) of the unamended schedule offences punishable under sections 8, 9 and 10 of the West Pakistan Arms Ordinance, 1965 if committed in respect of a handgrenade, bomb or rocket are exclusively triable by the Special Court and that any such offence committed in respect of Kalashnikov rifle would not be triable by the Special Court. Further under the unamended provisions of section 13 of the Arms Ordinance the maximum punishment in case of going armed without licence has been prescribed as 7 years' imprisonment or fine or both and in case of such offence committed in respect of Kalashnikov rifle including shall be not less than 3 years.

3. There have been lately effected amendments in the Arms Ordinance as well as Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) Act, 1975 by Ordinances Nos. XVI and XVII of 1988 published in the Gazette of Pakistan, Extraordinary Part I, dated 13th October, 1988. Ordinance No,XVI of 1988 has subjected the provisions of section 13 A.O. To the provisions of sections 13-A and 13-B and section 13-B has further prescribed the maximum punishment in 10 years and minimum 3 years' imprisonment and fine, in case of breach of section 8 i,e, going armed without licence of weapons inter alia Kalashnikov rifle. Ordinance No, XVII of 1988 has made corresponding amendment in paragraph (C) of the Schedule also including offences punishable under sections 13-A or 13-B of the Arms Ordinance to be exclusively triable by the Special Courts constituted under the Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) Act, 1975. However, since the said Ordinances were promulgated by the President in exercise of his powers conferred by Article 89 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 on 13-10-1988 and the same shall stand repealed at the expiration of 4 months from their promulgation if not earlier passed by the two Houses of Parliament and assented to by the President and as such the Ordinances stand repealed on or after 13-2-1989. That being the position the learned Special Court did not continue with the jurisdiction over the case at the time of commission of the offence and the impugned order passed by him on 11-3-1989. The offence committed under section 13 A.O. Shall continue to be punishable with normal sentence of maximum 7 years and minimum 3 years' imprisonment and accordingly to fall outside the purview of the prohibition contained in subsection (1) of section 497, Cr.P.C.

3. Besides accused-petitioner was apprehended in a car with another passenger and the unlicensed Kalashnikov rifle was allegedly recovered from his possession as carried by him and the recovery as such was witnessed only by police personnel although it was a case of prearranged raid.

' In the circumstances the accused petitioner is granted bail on furnishing bonds in the sum of Rs,30,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Illaqa/Duty Magistrate.

Cited by 5 cases

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.