QUTUBUDDIN vs THE STATE
This criminal appeal challenges the judgment dated 30-8-2001 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ratodero, which convicted and sentenced the appellant to fourteen years of rigorous imprisonment under section 7(c) of the Surrender of Illicit Arms Act, 1991. The core legal question before the Sindh High Court was whether a conviction under section 7(c) of the Surrender of Illicit Arms Act, 1991, is sustainable in the absence of a formal notification issued under section 4 of the same Act. Relying on the precedent established in Criminal Bail Application No. 561 of 2001 and others, the Court observed that the registration of a case and subsequent conviction under section 7(c) requires the existence of a valid notification under section 4. As the State conceded that no such notification existed, the Court held the conviction to be legally unsustainable. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the judgment and sentence were set aside, and the appellant was ordered to be released, provided he was not required in any other criminal case. The judgment affirms that statutory prerequisites, such as notifications, are mandatory for valid prosecutions under the Act.
- Can a conviction under section 7(c) of the Surrender of Illicit Arms Act 1991 be sustained without a notification under section 4 of the same Act?
- Is the absence of a required statutory notification fatal to a prosecution under the Surrender of Illicit Arms Act 1991?
- Section 4, Surrender of Illicit Arms Act 1991
- Section 7(c), Surrender of Illicit Arms Act 1991
ORDER
1. 'This appeal is directed against the judgment, dated 30-8-2001 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ratodero, convicting andksentencing the appellant to suffer R.I. For 14 years in Sessions Case No,485 of 2001 under section 7(c), Surrender of Illicit Arms Act, 1991.
2. ' Mr. Muhammad Ismail Bhutto, Advocate for State waives the notice or this appeal.
3. The counsel for the appellant referred to the order passed by this Court in Criminal Bail Application No,561 of 2001 and 9 others wherein it has been held that in the absehce of a Notification under section 4 of the Act (supra), no case under section 7(c) can be registered. Mr. Muhammad Ismail Bhutto concedes to this position and also concede if this appeal is admitted for regular hearing and allowed thereafter. In the circumstances, keeping in view the finding in Criminal Bail Application No,561 of 2001 and 9 others, this appeal is admitted to regular hearing and allowed.
4. Judgment and sentence is set aside and he may be set free if he is not required in any other case.