MUHAMMAD ASLAM alias SOOBA vs THE STATE
This criminal appeal challenges a conviction recorded by a Special Court constituted under the Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) Act, 1975, wherein the appellant was found guilty of possessing an unlicensed sten-gun and sentenced to two years of rigorous imprisonment. The core legal question before the Lahore High Court was whether the conviction could be sustained given that the Pakistan Arms (Amendment) Ordinance, 1988, and the Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) (Amendment) Ordinance, 1988, had expired due to a failure to receive approval from the National Assembly and the Senate, thereby lacking the force of law at the time of the trial. The State, represented by the Additional Advocate-General, conceded this position, acknowledging that the ordinances were not in force. Consequently, the High Court set aside the trial court's judgment and remanded the case to the District and Sessions Judge, Lahore, for entrustment to a court of competent jurisdiction. Additionally, the Court directed the appellant's release on bail pending the new trial, subject to the furnishing of bail bonds.
- Does a conviction based on an ordinance that has expired due to lack of legislative approval remain valid?
- What is the effect of an expired ordinance on the jurisdiction of a Special Court constituted under that ordinance?
- Can an appellate court order the release of an appellant on bail after setting aside a conviction and remanding the case for retrial?
- Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) Act, 1975
- Pakistan Arms (Amendment) Ordinance, 1988
- Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) (Amendment) Ordinance, 1988
' RASHID AZIZ KHAN, J.--- Muhammad Aslam alias Sooba was tried by the Court constituted under the Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) Act, 1975, on having been found in possession of a stcn-gun without licence. The learned trial Court vide judgment dated 3-8-1989 found him guilty for that and convicted him accordingly, and sentenced him to undergo R.I. For two years. _ ' The judgment has been impugned by the convict through the instant appeal.
2. The contention raised by learned counsel for the appellant that the Ordinance No, XVI of 1988 vide which Pakistan Arms (Amendment) Ordinance, and Ordinance No, XVII of 1988 pertaining to the amendment of the Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) (Amendment)
Ordinance, 1988 were not in field and had no force of law as the Ordinance stood expired on account of having not been approved by the National Assembly and the Senate. The position has not been controverted by the learned Additional Advocate-General, who appeared on the call. On having been confronted, learned Additional Advocate-General came to this conclusion after having gone through Muhammad Asif v. The State 1989 P. Cr. L J 1310, wherein such a view has been expressed. Learned Additional Advocate-General frankly conceded that he is not in a position to defend the judgment. In this view of the matter, judgment dated 3-8-1989 is set aside. The complete file of the case shall be sent to the District & Sessions Judge, Lahore, for entrustment for trial to the Court of competent jurisdiction.
' The appellant was on bail prior to his conviction vide judgment dated 3-8-1989. Since the said judgment has been set aside, we deem it proper to direct that he should be released from jail on his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs, 25,000 with two sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner, City, Lahore.
Cited by 7 cases
- MUHAMMAD KHAN vs THE STATE 1992 P Cr. L J 897
- SHAHBAZ Alias RAJA vs THE STATE 1992 P Cr. L J 1737
- MUHAMMAD SAGHIR vs THE STATE 1992 P Cr. L J 706
- MUHAMMAD MANSHA And Others vs THE STATE 1992 P Cr. L J 1755
- MUHAMMAD WALAYAT and others vs THE STATE 1993 P Cr. L J 2122
- NAEEM vs THE STATE 1991 MLD 2225
- ASHIQ HUSSAIN SHAH vs THE STAT 1991 P Cr. L J 2270