Saleem Kazi and others (Applicant) VS The State (Respondent)

C-n^ A* )}'^*LJ N- A-TA ' 6-.-t..-....( \c, T<--- CBRTIF'IC ATE OTi THtr COURT IN RtrGARD TO REPORTING CIUMINAT, Ii.EVISION NO. S-I64 OF 2022

SALEEVI KAZI AND OTHERS VS THE STATE

CRIMINAL REVISION NO. S-I35 OIf 2022

JAVEED ALI VS VIOLADAD & OTI_IERS

SINDH II IG rI COURT CIRCUIT C OURT H YDERABAD

COMPOSITION OF BENCTI

II ON'lll-l] lUtt.,, US'l't CE N,t Ot tr\ M Mu\ t) I{A IU NI I( I I A N z\G

I L.\

(s.8.)

Date of hearirrg (heard / reserved): 03-o2-2023 Decided.last on: 10-02-2023

(a)Judgment aipproved for reporting Yt,S (.

r CERTIF ICATE Certificate that the Judgment/Orcler is based Llpol-r enunciates a principle of law/decide a question of law which of first im pression / di stinguishe s over-rules/ explains previours clecision.

Stril<e -ou t rvltichr:vcr is not applicable.

NC)'l'D: (i) 'r'rris slip is o,ry ro rre rrscrr *,irerr sornc ii.rio' is t[) tx. ri]r{c,.

(ij)II the sliP is use<1, tlrc liea(ler r]rLrst allach it Io rlrc toi) thc first page oI tire JLt(lgm(jnt.

(iii)CoLlrt nssoci.tt(, lltust asl( lltt: ,Jrrrlge rvr_ilten llre jurJgrrrc. \vltctl)er llre jrrtlgrucnl is apltrovc<l Ior reporting.

(ir,) 'l.ltose (lire(:tiot.ts.r,r,lticlr arc not to l)c rrscrl slrorrki bc rlclclt,rl.

S(iP, l(.rr. t. (iii) 773 2(X)O_4_2Otj3 III

I'

Y

rI (l ?"

1l l{- 1s. lclz s

PRESI':NTIN I}II )-

ii(idit ta ri L',\ r" IN TI{E I{IGH COUR'I'OF SINDH CIRCUI-I'COURI' YI) IiRAB AD Criminal Revision Application No. S- /61/ of 2022. L Saleerr Kazi S/O Idruda Bux Kazi '(\-L-

2.Dr. Harneedullah Kazi S/O Saleem Kazi, \) 1r"l' Both Adult, Muslim, IllC Kazi, R/0 House No. 80.

Muslim Housing Society, Qasimabad, Hyderabad. I

3.Dr. Ghulam Qadir Kazi SiO Ahmed Khan Kazi. ( r '''"

J

4.Dr. Ahnred Waliullah Kazi S/O Ghulam Qadir Kaz.i Both 3 and 04 Adult, Muslirn, BIC Kazi, R/O l{ouse No. 72, Delencc O fficcrs Ilousing Society, District HydeLabad.

ilt,')

5.Dr. Roshan Bhatti S/O Jumrna Khan, t\) I Adult, Muslim, R/O C-52, Shahbaz Tor.vn behind Honda Palace. Hyderabad

6.Ghulan Rasool Kazi S/O Muharnrnad Bachal Kazi, Adult, Muslinr, B/C Kazi, R/O House No. B-2 12, 42, I Gizri Plrase 4, DHA Karachi.

7.Saijad Ali S/O Ali Bukhsh Kazi,

Adult, Muslim, BiC Kazi, R/O House No. C-120, Muhalla Gulstan Sajjad, Qasirnabad, Ityderabad.

t 3 \ v

li. Nluhamm a<l Zafar Bhatti S/O Muhammad Shuaib Bhatti. Adult, Muslirr, B/C Bhatti, R/O Near Isra University Foundation School, House No. B-57, Muhalla lsra Torvn Housing Scheme, By-pass.

IJyderabad City, District Hyderabad. . . .. . ,Applicants

Versrrs The State.

Respondent

Crime N o.09 of2022

U/S: U/S 353, 324, 147

, 1 48 , t49,337_H (ii), F-(i), F-(iii) P.P.C Poli ce Station Hatri D tstrict llyderabatl.

I

,'l PPESSIIFD \ I.., Lu.

Artliu

IN THE HIGH

COURT OF SINDH,

H YDERABAD

Criminal Revision CIR ,1*r''^- Application ur tfo r. t35 of 2022.

g;''in:ilt,[Lq.{:.i*ffi1

APPLICANT/

cotuplattvarur

VERS US

j Hi?ixi.Y,?,1;f Hl;. o*.., ; ;lilj r;,xlffilx.?,",n,., j,:?ri 11"1,ff :txi*?sh,,",, ." ::il v""ff :fxif#';'n.,; Lti:,il jJ,l_l il,,."x."IJ;n

Hospitar, ;I#,:r'""J:

... RESPO]VDENTS/

.-_ __ accuseo.

r'- t-) - ir^r, ,r r16 ,leo ir p_{: f, /f,U

\B

(rt{t)l lt \llll l

IN TrrE Hr(;lt coLil{'l-oF stNl)lt, ( llt('trl l ('olllt'[ , Il\ l)1'.It,\It.\l).

(lr. l{cr,isiorr Applicatiorr No.S-l(i4 ol 202l I)A'l'lr Olil)lrl{ Wl-l'l I SI(lNA l tll{lr Ol: .l tltXill I I:ul Lrrtlcrs orr ollicc obi cctrons 2 l;or lreali [g (]! !r !Ut) C!!>!t.

3 Iror hearr ng ol M.A No.l0134t22.

l.

M/S. Sriiad Ahnrcrl Chantlio. Asat[ Shaliil l(han and llrrrristcr / ltirr Musta la Soturlo. Advocatr' Iirr appl icartt(s )..

Mr. Aijaz Shaili.h. Advocrrte tbr PW Shoaib-ul-flassan.

Mr'. A1'az llussairr ILtnio. Aclvocitte ltrr l)W Motrla I)ad.

Mr. (ihularrrLrlllh Chang. n d\'()cale lol irr.itrretl .lavcd Ali Ms. Sana Mer.norr. Assistant l)tosecttltlt (.ieneral. Sindh.

, I har,e lreurtl (lte ttalttccl cutttrsels lirr the altplicirrtts as u'cll as Icttt'ttctl Asst. [)rosccr.rtor (ierrcral assistctl bi, le ttnetl couttsels lbr aggt icvccl ptrrtr l{eserved ltrl orders

,L4

.r(,, (; I,l

I

l-/r A-e* J!-*,U \.!. NT,A \4--'-L.^."-J t= 'T(- w

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH,

CIRCUIT COURT I{YDERABAD

Cr. Rev. App1. No.S- 164 of 2022 Cr. Rev. Appl. No.S- 135 of 2022.

DATE ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGES

1 . For orders on office ob.iection(s).

. For hearing of the main case.

.) . For hearins of M.A- 1O734 of 2022 (Stay ap plication ) Date of hearing: 03.O2.2023 Date of order: 1O.O2.2023

M/s. Sajjad Ahmed Chandio, Asad Shakil I(han and Barrister Zain Mustafa Soomro, Advocates for tl-re applicants.

Mr. Aijaz Shaikh, Advocate for PW Shoaib-ul-Hassan.

I

Mr. Ayaz Hussain Tunio, Advocate for PW Moula Dad.

Mr. Ghulamullah Chang, Advocate for injured/PW/applicant Javed Ali in Cr. Rev. A. No.S- 164 12022 and Cr. Rev. A No.S- 135 / 2022, respectively.

Ms. Sana Memon, Addl: P.G Sinclh

ORDER

MOHAMMAD KARIM KHAN AGHA. J.-Tt.rrough instant criminal revision application, applicants have challenged the order dated 19.1L2O22, passed by learnecl 7rH Additional Sessions Judge, Hyderabad in Sessions Case No.634 of 2022, whereby the learned Judge in the concluding para has passed the forowir-rg directions:- ir "So, under these circuntstances, I am of this humble uiew that this case squarelg falls tuithin the exclusiue d.omain of Anti Terrorism Court and resultantly, this court cannot take cognizance of the matter. LO of this case/ DSp Hala is d"irected to collect the R&Ps and submit the same before competent authoity i.e Anti Terrortsnt Courl for passing appropriate Ord.er as to who would be charged, as accused and tagged. as witness. OJJice is dtrected to comntunicate this order ii t.O yor

B

q l

collection of record for compliance of Order. Accused persorls are directed to appear before Anti-Terrorism Court and are no more required before this Court and their bail bonds are discharged urLder these circumstances. "

2.Being aggrieved by the said order, the applicants have / preferred instant revision applications along with one aggrieved party.

3.The facts of the case in brief as per FIR lodged on behail of the State by SIP Aftab Memon are as under:-:-

"On behalf of State it is contplained that I am posted as SlP/acting SHO at PS Hati. Todag on 15.01.2021, I was present at Police Station tuhere 15 command base had noted through mobile phone and informed that the firing is taktng place inside and outstde of Isra Uniuersitg. On such information staff namelg PC-2058 Rustam Zantan, PC-4646 Shahnawaz Khosa, PC-381 Abdul Qadeer, PC-1187 Muhammad Hakin4 PC- 7162 Rasheed Ahmed, PC-2811 Ali Hassan along uith arnts and ammunition, uide roznamcha entrg No.29 at 1755 in police mobile No.SPC-605 proceeded towards Isra Uniuersity from PS. PC Ali Hassan was diuing and tue reached at Isra uniuersitg at r 1755. Firing uLas talcing place inside and outside of the Isra Uniuersitg and ma ny people tuere gathered there. Wherein the information taken what tuo,s knoutn that there is a conflict between O2 groups of Isra Uniuersitg. In the meanuthile ue entered in the Isra Uniuersity u.thereirt the people irtformed us that one person has been shot tuhich is lging at the gate in injured condition. Where rL'e proceeded totuards him and sau-t that one person was injured that from which we inquired about name and parentage tuho told his name as Jaaed S/o Shafi Muhammad, B/C Jaffery, R/O permanentlg residing at Village Wargant Khan PO Shikarpur Taluka and District Shikarpur, Presently at Ali Abad Colong Hgderabad. He was sent to Ciuil Hospital after giuing letter for treatntent. We tuere going totuards Administration Block tuhere unknown persons with intention to comnit rnurder ntade straight Jiing at us tuhere in our selJ'-defense made fires and for about 1O/ jS minutes firing tuas continued. We tried to a.rrest the accused but ntanaged to escape tLtrough aerial firing. We narrated such information to our Ligh ups and after some tinte police force arriued to help us, tuhom we put on dutg in different places. As enough number of unknown accttsed in order to make hindrance in our lau.tful duty comntits offences U/S 353, 324, 147, 148, 149, 337H(2) PPC. Where pubtic mashir not arranged timely we appoint PC Rustam Zaman anci pC Shahnawaz as Mashir and checlc the place of incident tuhere we secured OB emptg of TT pistol, 15 empty carlridge of 12 bore fired. bg accused, and O5 empties of SMG, O7 en'Lpties of G-3 riJle ftred" bg us. Where the empties of TT Pistol and 12 bore Cartid"ge fired bg accused and entpties of SMG ancl G-3 riJle fired by police party bg sealing for ltSL prepared masLtirnama of t

l

o

recouery and took signatures of aboue mashirs. Bg placing recouered property h safetg and assigned staff on dutg returned at PS Hctti. As alreadg there haue been clashes to gain control over administratiae matters betueen 02 groups of Isra Uniaersitg, This time too there has been a clc'sh due to which Javed Ali Jaffery has been injured due to a bullet, Both groups hqd clashed preuiouslg and there was slso ftring, whose such ccrses were also reglstered. As unknoutns accused tuith their comntott intention by comrnitting riotirtg hindered in our laufttl dtLtg uith intention to nturder us ntade straight fires utltere on beha[ of state aboue case has been registered against ur-tkttotun accused. We saw unknoutn accused clearlg and identifu thent on seeing' I made 10 fires from SMG, staJJ will show in their statements.(bold added) sd/ -

SIR P.S Hati, Hyderabad"

4.After hearing the learned counsels for the parties, learned 7th Additional Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, has passed the impugned order which is now under challenge.

T 5. Learned counsel for the applicants and oue aggrieved party the injured Javed contended that that the court had no jurisdiction to pass the impugned order; that the counsel for the applicants u,ere not heard and not put on notice; that as thts u'as a case of personal enmity and vendetta bet'uveen tr'vo rival groups the case did not fall within tl-ie purview of tl-re ATA r,r,l-rich was supported by most of the documents on record ir-rcluding the FIR and both challans and that even other wise the mens rea to convert this case in to one of terrorism as set out in 5.6(1) (b) and (c) had not been proven and as such the case could not fall within the purview of the ATA. In support of tl-reir contentions they placed reliarrce on the cases of Ghulam Hussain and others V The State and others (PLD 2O2O SC 61), Ali Gohar and others V Pervaiz Ahmed and others (PLD 2O2O SC 427), Bashir Ahmed V Muhammad Siddique and others (PLD 2009 SC 11), Allahyar and another V Judge, Anti-Terrorism Court Naushahro Feroze and, 2 others (2O19 PCT.LJ 549), Basharat Ali V Special Judge, Anti-Terrorism Court-II, Gujranwala (PLD 2004 Lahore 199), Farooq Ahmed V The State and another (2020 SCMR 78), Ahmed Jan V Nasrullah and others (20i2 SCMR 59), Shahbaz Khan alias Tippu and others V Special i

r> Judge, Anti-Terrorism Court No.3, Lahore and others (PLD 2016 SC 1), Waris Ali and 5 others V The State (2017 SCMR 1572), Malik Changez Khan V The State through P.G Sindh and 11 others (2O2O PCr.l) 1639) and Muhammad Akbar Khan and 3 others V SHO P,S. Garhi Khairo, District Jacobabad and others (2017 PCr.Ll 1280).

6.Learned APG and learned counsel for other aggrieved parties supported the impugned order and contended that it had been passed in accordance with law; that all the aggrieved parties were heard; that the case fel1 squarely within the ambit of the ATA as the actions of the accused met the requirements of S.6(2) (n) and (m) of the ATA which concern (m) serious coercion and intimidation of a public servant in order to force him to discharge or refrain from discharging his 1awfu1 duties and (n) concerns serious violence against a member of the police force, armed forces or civil armed forces or a public servant and since it was an attack on a hospital the relevant mens rea had been proven under S.6(1) (b) and (c); that the criminal revision application was not the appropriate remedy at this stage as it was for the applicants to move an application under Section 23 ATA before the ATC rvhere the case had been sent for trial as per the impugned order. In sllpport of their contentions they placed reliance on the cases of Ghulam Hussain and others V The State and others (PLD 2O2O SC 6I), Nazeer Ahmed and others V Nooruddin and another (20 12 SCMR 517) and Tariq Ali Jatoi and another V The State and another (2022yLR Note 137).

7.I have considered the arguments of learned counsels for the parties, perused the record and the case law cited by them at the bar.

B. Since these Revision Applications in essence challenge the impugned order not to transfer this case from the ordinary court to the Anti-Terrorism court (ATC) I intend to restrict myself to the basic point whether as a matter of law based on the facts and circumstances of the case the actior-rs of the accused brought their case within the ambit of the Anti Terrorism Act 1997 (ATA).

9.In order for an act to come within the purview of the ATA trvo basic requirements need to be met under S.6 of the ATA.

(a)Firstly the act must fali within the meaning of any of the sub clauses set out in 5.6 (2) of the ATA. Based on the facts and circumstances of this case it is extremely likely as alluded t to earlier by the learned APG/ respondents/ interveners that the acts of the accused fall at least within 5.6 (2) (n) and (m) ATA and

(b)Secondly the act must also either fali u'ithin 5.6 (1) (b) or (c) of the ATA which are set out below for ease ol reference.

(b)the use or threat is designed to coerce and intimidate or overawe the Government or the public or a section of the public or community or sect or a foreign government or population or an international organization or create a sense of fear or insecurity in society; or

(c)the use or threat is made lor the purpose of advancing a religious, sectarian or ethnic cause or intimidating and terrorizing the public, social sectors, media persons, business community or attacking the civilians including damaging property by ransacking, looting, arson or by any other means, government officials, installations, security forces or law enforcement agencies:

Provided that nothing herein contained sl-rall apply to a democratic and religious raliy or a peaceful demonstration in accordance with law.

10.In the case of Ghulam Hussain V State (PLD 2O2O SC 61) a larger 7 member bench of the Supreme Court after a detailed analysis of the ATA and the larv of terrorism both domestically and internationally held as under at P. 131 para 16;

"For tuhat has been dlscussed aboue it is concluded ancl declared that for an action or threat of acttort to be accepted as terroisnt tuitLtirt the tneaning of sectiort 6 of the Anti Terrorisnt Act, 1997 the action must falL irL subsection (2) of sectiott 6 of the said Act and the use or threat of such action must be d.esigned to qchleae ang of the objectiues speciJied in clause (b) of subsection (7) of section 6 of tho.t Act or the use or threat of such acti.ort ntust be to achieue any of the purposes ntentioned irt clause (c) of subsectior-L (1 ) oJ section 6 of that Act. It is clariJied that any actiort constituting an offen-ce, hotusoeuer graue, shocking, brutal, gnrcsotne or horcifging, does not qualifu to be termed as terrorisrn i/ it is not cornmitted uith the design or purpose specified or mentioned in clauses (b) or (c) of subsection (7) of section 6 oJ the said Act. It is further clartJied that the o.ctions specifi.ed in subsection (2) of section 6 of that Act do not qualifg

to be labeled or charq.cterized as terrorism if such actions are taken in furtherance of personal enmitg or priuate uendetta,(bold added).

11.It is quite clear from the above excerpt that the act as defineci in Section 6 (a) (2) must be designed or its purpose must be to create the consequences whicl-r follor,v ir-r Section 6(1) (b) and (c) and that cases of personal enmity/private vendetta do not fall within the ATA.

Did the Acts in this case fall within the purview of the ATA keeping in view Section 6( 1) (b) and (c) of the ATA and Ghulam Hussain's case (Supra)?

12.At the outset as regards the contention that the parties were not heard or given notice in respect of the impugned order this is belied by the names of the counsel and their arguments being reproduced in the impugned order. It may be that the concerned court might have lacked authority to pass the impugned order but in any event none of the counsels wanted the case remanded as in v essence it was not in dispute that the ISRA campus Hyderabad had been attacked but rather which court would hear the matter. Namely the ordinary court of law or the ATC. Although I find the impugned order over elaborate on the qLlestion of the ATA being applicable and it would have been better to refer this matter as per the required legal procedure the reality is that it has made a detailed finding which might ever-r mal<e a Section 23 ATA application now some what prejudiced/redundant and as such in the interest of justice I have decided to decide this legal issue and avoid further unnecessary delay. Although it is doubtful whether the aggrieved parties had any locus standi to be heard I have allowed them in the interests of justice to assist the learned ApG.

13.As a preliminary point Order of this court in Cp No.D-2225 of 2022 dated 04.70.2022 barred re investigation but permitted further investigation which is quite usual under the lara, and keeping in view that the Sessions Court is not bound by the opinion of the Io or the PG's office as such I find that there was no illegality committed in carrying out a further investigation in the matter and as such the supplementary challan submitted after the further Ll

y!

investigation remains in the field and will be used for the purposes of trial.

14.it is now well settled that actions taken in pursuant to personal enmity ancl private vendetta do not come within the purview of the ATA. The case record reveals that there is a great riva1ry/enmity between the two parties to take over control of the administration of ISRA University Hyderabad and in this regard as per record a plethora of litigation has passed/is pending between the parties vying over the administration of ISRA University Hyderabad between it appears the Kazi group and the Laghari group. For example, I reprocluce belotv just t.tt o orders in material part dated O5.OA.2O22 and, 12.08.2022 respectively passed in Suit No. 1491 of 2O22 pending at the High Court at I(arachi to illustrate this point;

ORDER DATED O5.O8.2O2 2 IN SUIT NO.NIL OF 2022

v 3. Per learned counsel for the plair-rtiffs, number of Suits/Petitions, are pending ir.r this Cor-trt liled either by the Plaintiffs or tl-re Defenclants rvherein restraining orders have been obtained by the parties. Re1'erence of such litigation is already mentioned in tl-re memo ol plaint as well as photocopies of certifiecl copies of such orders passed b.y this Court are enclosed r.vitl-r the memo oI plaint. Learnecl counsel for tl-re plaintiffs urges that Defenclant No. t has launched a malicior_rs, clefan-ratory ancl scandalous campaign at the behest of the remainirrg Defer-rclants in the social, digital and print mcclia. Such clefan-ratory campaign launched by the Defendants is adversely alfecting tl-re imale 9_f ISRA University and the stuclents of ISRA Universily Karachi, Islamabad and HvclerabeLcl campuses. Learned counsel for the plaintiffs has referred to a Notice issued for the attention of the parents and students of ISRA University issued under signature of the Defendant No.1 which contains malicious, defamatory and scandalous contents/material. For the ready reference, some of the operational part of the said Notice is available at Annexure A/ I at Page-39 is reproduced as under:- "An unauthorized group of people who haue illegallg occupied the Islamabad. and Karachl cctmpuses of ISRA Uniuersitg are trying to rob students and d.estrog their Juture bg issuing Jake degrees and dre demand.ing cash froi the students to get their degrees. While the fee for the degree is deposited. in the form of Demand.

Draft/Pag Order, in fauour o.;f ISRA Uniaersitg, Hgderabad along with the verift.ed documents,

S

\q S At the same, the approued signatories on the degree bg the Hlgher Education Cornmission of Pakistan, Pakiston Medic al Cornmission, Pakistan Engineering Council, Pakistan Nursing Council, and all Other releuant regulatory authoities are the Vice Chancellor, TSRA lfniuersitg, Prof, Dr. t Nazeer Ashral Leghari, Controller of Exatninations, Mr. Tariq Aziz Scmoo and Registrar, ISRA Uniuersitg, Mr. Abdul eadir Memon, Ang degree issuerl other than the legitimate signatories will be illegal and uilt not be accepted bg the HEC, PMC, PEC, PNC and other regulatory bodies."

Learned counsel for the plaintiffs then has referred to the same Notice which has been issued in the social media on different dates and also published in daily Dawn Karachi in its issue on O4.Oa.2O2Z. Copy whereof is enclosed as Annexure 'A/3' at Page-43. Let notices to the Application listed at Serial No.3 to be issued to the Defendants through all modes except publication. Ti11 the next date of hearing, the Defendants are restrained from issuing an.v malicious, defamatory and scandalous statements by publishing or circulating in the social, digital and print media against the t plaintiffs/ Campuses of Isra Ur-riversity, I(arachi, Islamabad and Hyderabad as has been issued by the defendar-rts No.1 as referred above. Let this Suit be fixed alor-rg tvith depending Suits of the ISRA University ."vhich are already fixed on 16.O8.2022.(bold added) sd/- Jr-rdge"

ORDER DATED 23.04,2022 IN SUIT NO.NIL ( t49t lof

2)This suit was filed by Isra islamic Foundation and Isra University through its authorized officer along with other individuals. There is apparently a disputb as to who the lawlui Vice Chancellor of Isra University is, which is likely to be resolved in the pending bunch of cases, in particulir JCM No.29 of 2020. However, since it requires detailed arguments rvhich perhaps is not possible to be concluded today,"learned counsel for defendant No.1, who also claims to be Vice Chancellor of Isra University, has requested to take up on priority basis this application under order XXXIX Rule 4 CpC for some modification in the exparte ad-interim order obtained by the plaintiffs on 12.08.2022, so that degrees which are being awarded at this stage ol dispute may not go un_ scrutinized and unverified. The substance of the interim order is as under: - ""id ,.d_ "Issue notice to the defendants for j6.08.2022, when instant suit utill be taken-up alongu.tith aforesaid. suits, Luhich are already fixed on the said. date, in tlrc

I

b

meatltinte the defendants are restrained Jiont interfering with the degree a uLarding process of the plaintiffs, and defendant ly'os. I to 3 or their subordinates are restrained front requiing the students of Isra Uniuersitg l{ctracli and Islantabad cantpuses from getting their degrees uertfied, attested etc. from s thent. Defendants are furlher restrai.ned front initiatina any action and/ or front lodging conLplcLints against the plaintiffs in relatiort to issuance of degrees of l{arachi and Islamabad cantpuses, till the next date of heaing." I have heard the learnecl counsel and perused record. Mr. Arshad Tayebali, learned counsel appearing for defendant No.1, submits that a blanl<et powers have been given to plaintiff No.2, presently under control ol a disputed Vice Chancellor, for admissions and a,,varding degrees without any process of verification and attestation from anyone including defendants No. 1 to 4 out of whom one is Vice Chancellor, as claimed, and the other is HEC. pending litigation would likely to resolve the controversy as to u,l-r o the lawful Vice Chancellor of Ur.riversit)r is. On this issue alone as to whetl-rer there could be a process of verification and attestation of the degrees from any of the defendar-rts arraycd here or should these degrees as awarded by the plaintilf No.2 tl-rrough its dispr-rtecl Vice l' Chancellor be reached to the offices concernecl, without ar-ry verification or attestation.

By virtue of ad-interim orcler all defendants ir-rcluding HEC are restrained from interfering with the clegree awarding process of the plaintiffs and further defendants No.1 to 3 or their subordinates are restrained from requiring the students of Isra University I(arachi ar-rd Islamabad Campus from getting their degrees verified ancl attested etc. from them and also from HEC.

No doubt a dispute regarding claim of being lawful Vice Chancellor is subject matter of these proceedings and some individuals claiming themselves to be Vice Chancellors are acting and taking actions purportedly for running Isra University, which includes all activities to run a university, but such degree awarding process cannot go un-scrutinized while the titigation would give a concluded picture as to who the lawful Vice Chancellor is. The Isra University, being run by some individuals claiming themselves to be Vice Chancellor and office bearers cannot be given this blanket permission during pendency of this dispute. Hence the contention of learned counsel for defendant No. I that the- degrees as being awarded should not go unattended and at least should get a verilication and authentication from the office of HEC is not without reasoning. Defendants No.1 to 3 in vierv of allegecl suspensior-r have a role for verificatiotr ancl attestation -"y ,rJt of the degrel but HEC i.e. defendar-rt No.4 does. The future of the sludents rvho are getting themselves enrollecl as students and as a consequence, are being au,arded degrees, cannot go

l0 q1 unchecked risking the entire system of higher education where degrees are being ar,varded, hence in all fairness I deem it appropriate that all degrees tl-iat are being awarded should be passed through a verification process from HEC, if not from defendants No. 1 to 3. With this understanding the ad-interim order dated 12.O8.2022 be read and modified accordingly.

Application stands disposed of. (bold added)

i5. The enmity between the parties is recognized in the FIR in the following terms,

tuherein the inforrnation taken uthat wqs known that there is d conflict between 02 groups of Isra Uniuersitg,,....,.. 4s alreadg there haue been clashes to gain control ouer administratiue tnatters between O2 groups of Isra Unioersitg, 'Ihis time too there has been a clash due to uhich Jaued Ali Jaffery ho's been injured due to a bullet. Both groups had clashed preuiouslg and there utas also firing, whose such cases were also registered",

16.The enmity between the parties is recognized in both the initial challan and the final supplementary challan (after further I investigation) neither of which mention that ahy offences have been committed under the ATA and even Section 161 Cr.PC statement of injured eye witness Javed Ali who is mentioned in the FIR and both chailans states that it was a fight between two groups.

17 . From the above referred piethora of litigation mentioned above including the orders reproduced above, wording of FIR and wording of both the initial and supplementary challan after further investigation and Section 16 1 statement of injured eye witness Javed I find that there is enmity and personal vendetta between the respective parties in gaining administrative control of the ISRA University Hyderabad which lead to the incident. This enmity and personal vendetta between the rival parties \,vas even recognized in the impugned order when read in a holistic manner in the following term s;

"The statemet-rts of tl-re witnesses l-rave brought into the notice of this Court tl-rat several proceeclings are pending before Honorable High Court such as CP No.6529 of 2020, suit No.B10 of 2021 & J.C.M No.29 of 2O2O even there are orders restraining both sides i.e. Dr. Laghari & Dr. Kazi from interfering in the domain of each other',.

IU

lt \q "...Statements.....show t1-r at the accused persons rvho have been named by the fresh IO attacked on the ISRA University and Hospital with the basic motive of taking its control" "I do not see a normal person rvould now attend ISRA University without fear of re-occLtrrence of this t1,pe of incident when he would think that even the founding members of l hospital are fighting for control and this t1,pe of incidet-rt cal-I re-occur rvl-rich may cost lives of ir-rnocent people coming there for treatment or visiting any patient." (bold addecl) 18. As such on account of persor-ral enn'rity and vendetta I fincl that this case does not fal1 u,ithin the purvie,"v of the ATA.

19.Even otherwise, ATC No.l Hyderabad has already considered whether this case falis within the ambit of the ATA which it found it did not based on the particular facts and circumstances of the case and the relevant law pursuant to its order dated 07 ,02.2022 in respect of a direct complainant rvhich had been made in respect of this aspect of the case by one oI the aggrieved parties which is reproduced as under for ease of reference in material part;

1" ..ORDER PASSED BY JUDGE ANTI-TERRORISM

COURT NO,1 HYDERABAD DATED 07.06.2022 ON

DIRECT COMPLAINT U/S 19(CI OF ANTI

T RRORISM ACT, 1997, FILED BY COMPLAINANT

SHOAIBUL HASSAN.

Loolring to the aboue subject scenctrio in order to ariue at trutthiness or false hood of the contplainant, statement under Section 200 Cr.P.C tuas recorded through his aduocate. This tuitness introd.ucecj the story that on 15.01.2022 at about O5:30 p.m, he was auailable at his ofJice lrcard the contmotion and uoice of firing noticed front the windotu that so ntang persons utere auailable hauinq arnted with tueapons t their hands malcing fire. According to this witness, he identtfied Ahmed Waliultah Kazi, Hameedullah Kazl, Sajjad Kazi, Mouhli Nisqr Sha4 Ghulam Rasool Kazi, and Zafar Bhatt| ntho were directing the mob to occupg the Uniuersitg, On instigation of the aboue person, the said armed persons entered into I.T Department damaged the LT Sgstenr in orcler to hid.e tLrcir actiuities. Theg toolc laptops, conrputers arLd. other electronic articles also snatclted. mobile phones and. u.teapons frorn the sectLri.tg guards and other staff. The securitg guards were hostages. TLte accused also ntaLtreated guard Yourtus Panhwai. Due to said act of the a.ccused, the sense of fear and insecuritg spread dmong the emplogees of Uniaersitg,,

I

]I

l2

Hospital, Patients and uisitors. The shops adjacent to the tlniuersitg started closing beca.use oJ the said situation. The incident was q.lso witnessed bg the (Jniuersitg emptogees and other people. This cornplainant then intimated the incident to VC qnd ..75',. The incident was I also captured in CCTV Camera, After sonrc time police ariued attd complainan.t partLl was rescued. He stated that the accused. partg also nnde fires upon the police partg and it the result of firing, a person front the accused side tuas injured. The accused then escaped atuag. Accordi.tglg, the inciclent was htforntecl and police asked the contplaincmt party to appear at the P.S. Hati ancl tuhen he (tl-re cont-plaittant) rea.ched at the P.S the FIR of the sttbject citne had aLreadg Lodged in respect of tlt.e altegecl ofJbnce. The cornplainant further states that the facts of the FIR were twisted and suppressed bA the police as the incident was published, flashed and teleuised through electronic, social and print media created funk and panic in the societg. As per uerslon oJ the direct complaint, the complainant partg obtained direction of the learned Sessions Court in shape of order on application u/s 22-A/B Cr,p.C for recording 161 t,. Cr.P.C statement but police faited to prouide them justice finding no hope from the police appeared and Jiled the said complaint, ln uietu of P.E the Jacts d.iuulged through the corttplainant ruilnesses under Section 202 of Cr.p.C Moulctdad and Atuan, Nazeer Alti, these both pltn.esses hctue supportecl the uersion of the complainant front Alpha to Orttega and if compared their uersions o.f the direct complaint with the statements written in sindhi no significant result appear of ang terrorisrn with regard to act of the proposed accused q"bout ang psgchological impact upon the people created terrir, panic or sense of insecuritg at large as well as societg in particular. Therefore, case against accused for the particular offence of terrorism did not qualifg to be a terrortst act within contemplation of Section 6 of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997. So far serious damage to the hospital propertg / c-omrnoditg as alleged in term of Section Z1w1 oy Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 is concerned, it d.oes not appear to haue taken place in the said. scenq.rio and circumstqnces dilated. upon ordinary crime. /t ls also to be noted- that applicatiort under Section 22-A(6)(i)(iii) Cr.p.C achieuecl no re sttlt by the contplainant ancl it tuas dlsmissed uid.e order dated 3/ 02/ 2022. So Ja, furlher d.euelopntent challerrying the sante orcler before sttpeior forunt cotrld not be had by tlrc complainant, but iirtply

l.l

stated in the arguntents about its penclency, Further, the complalnant and. uritnessei haue itso stated. in their respectiue statements that there woLs d. comtnotion within precinct of the hospital and theg had seen the incident from windlu of the office lot of uariation in the statement of the i complainant pointed. out cannot be touched at this stage substantiqllg would. ccutse prejud.ice of the case adjudicate before the coui oj bw but one thing which is noted tho.t the na.mes of the persons shown in the footages produced. with the direct complaint nouthere it is shoun that the said persons were shown armed with weapons mad.e Jiring and again mere Jiring and simplg injury the case of terrorism is not mq.d,e out as rnostlg persons were emptg handed. or were seen taking precious articles of the hospital propertg and on' this score the liabilitg of ierrorism cdnnot be judged/assigned that the staff members or patients auailable in the hospitit was in Srip of terrorism clue to act oj the proposed accused. T'h.e best forunt. of t.he con4tlainant tucls to trtke actictrt prontptlg to apprctach the high-up crgctir-tst tlne l.O' cutci lt;:proach the concerrrcd cotttl tLthere challan tuas stLbinittecl as this L Court tuitlrout rttaterial cannot be ussunrcd to trg the cases of lilcetuise nature.

No doubt, the terroisnT nleatTs for an action or threat of action to be accepted as tenloisnt wi tin the rneantng of Section 6 of the sqicl Act and. the use or threat of such action ntust be d-esigned. to achieue any of^tle oljectlues specified. in clausJ @) of sttbsection (i) of Section 6 of that Act, or the use or threat of su,ci action must be to achieue any of purpose n-tentionecl in c_lause (c) of subsection (1) oj S"itioi 6 of the said- Act.

It is further clarified that the actioi specilied in subs,ection (2) of section 6 of the said.Act d.o qualifg to be la.beled, or characterized. not as terrorism if such action are taken in of p_ersonal enmitg or priuate uend.etia, furtherance It is also fact on record tho.t the fighting belwgey the parties - jiu.n" took place color on crdministrrrtion malpractice 6f the hotspital record also shous thqt theri ,ru .ourit", and betuteen them cqnnot be ignored slighttg "o"." stage, at this uiew of aboue cllscusslon it is quite clear, that the facturn disclosecl bg the cotnplainant ancj his ruilne^sses do not cluctliJy the preseni incid.ent to be an act of terrotisnt triable al thii _forum as the facts focus :\:!? qi.*" contplaint aclntiited. to be utolen-t act of rrespectiue nature cannot be tenned. that the sante toolc p-Lace tuitltin frante uork of terroisnt to ctchieue ang objectiue ctnd design as deJined in the parameters,

D

l4

of sub-section (a)(b)(c) of Section 6 of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, hence instant direct complaint ls not maintainable and dismissed.

Giuen under mg lwnd and seal of the court dated this 7th daA of June, 2022. (bold added) I Judge Anti-terroism Court- 1 , Hgderabad"

20.Thus, I find that apart lrom the issue of their being personal enmity/vendetta between the parties which excluded the case from the purview of the ATA, that the design, object and purposes to produce certain consequences as set out in 5.6 (1) (b) and (c) which would lead to the acts amounting to terrorism are also absent in this case and as such even on the facts of the case it does not fall within the purview of the ATA.

2l . As such the criminal revision application bearing No.S- 164 of 2022 is allowed, impugned Order is set aside and learned Judge L ATC No.1 Hyderabad is directed to return the R&P's and case file to the Court of 7tt Additional Sessions Judge Hyderabad which shall try the case under the ordinary iaw as laid down in the ppC as mentioned in the last supplementary challan which was submitted after further inquiry which trial should be completed expeditiously.

22.As regard the Cr. Rev. A. No.S-135 of 2022 is concerned, the same in view ol my findings (aforementioned) has become infructuous and is disposed of accordingly.

23, A copy of this order shall be shall be sent to Learned Judge ATC No.1 Hyderabad and Learned 7th Additional Sessions Judge Hyderabad for compliance.

24.The criminal revision applications are disposed of in the above terms along with all pending applications.

JU l/( ) ttL L!

I4