SHAHNAWAZ S/O ALLAH WASAYA (Appellant) VS THE STATE (Respondent)

fu-1-.'.,t-,-^ & i\^ 31o

I IN TI{E I{IGH COURT'OF SINDFI AT I(ARACFII

PIiIiSI.,N I llr. lustict ltl o lrotrurrttd Krritn l(httt,,1llrtt l\l r. l tts t it't Zu l.l irlrrr .l l i l tt tl i.

sPL. Cr{rMrNAL A.T. AppEALS NQ-164 & 165 OF 20?'t

A1'rp1:ll1p1 Shaltnau,,az S/o Alah Wasaya 'fhrouuh Mr. C.lvl. Illlrtto, i\tlrroc.rtr,

Rt:sprorrrle n i 'Ihe Statc througll Mr. Mulrar.nr.rratl Iqbal Aw,an, Aclcl itiorral Prosecutor Gcncral, Sincll.r.

rl

SPL. CITIMINAI, A.T IAI L APPHALS NO.187 & t8U ()lr 20lt

I

A ppclla nt Murtaza srl o Nazcer Ahr.nt'rl 'fhrcugh Mr. Cl.N4. Ilhutto, Arl.. ocait,

R('spoltdent 'I'he Statc through Mr'. Muhanrnrarl Iclbal r\rvan, Adr1itionaI I'roscr'rr krr' Ccnt:r,:1, Sinrlh.

I D,ttc of I Iea linli I9.08.202 t

.Date of Ortler: 19.OrJ.2021

I

IUT]GMENl' Nloharrrntacl I(.rrirr.r Klr.rn Agha, J. I Irt, i\Ppcll.rnts Sh.rh..rrr,.rz anil NlLri l.r,.r \\'(,r'c c()n\.ictc(l in the Citrrlt oi ,,\nf i- Icr.rorisnt ( ourt Nrr.\. Karar.lti il St'ssitrns (.rst, No121 of 202t) ir.r ('rinrr' \o.(r71 ol 1020 LrrtrLr,t. SL,iliorr. 397i 35ii 32,1/3.1 [)PC r',r rn, Scction 7 oi ,\'l A, 1()97, li|ecial ( asl, Nir. \]l-,'\ rt 2020 rn Crir:te No.b72 L,t 202() unJe,r St'cfiun' Jjir) ,,\ Srntlh Ar.nrs A-t, l(tlli.rrrrl SI.c.cjal (-as,. No.32l-B of 2(12() jn C-r.inrt )io.(r7.1 ()l l()l() Sr(.fi()11 231i1 i\ Srrrrtlr Atttts,,\r.t, 2013 r'egistt'rcel .rt I'S C rr list.r n-t'-la rr lta r, K.rrachi r.itic consrrliLl,rt..rl Ju(18r.ncnt tiatctl 27.09.2021 antl n,t-,rtr scr.tt('ltc(,Li trs rn.rrl,.:r: .t;

il I I'],r:{i 1,,i4

1.'l'he accusecl Shahrratvaz s/o Allah Warsaya ancl Murt;rzir s/ r, \;17r.,, Alrmecl were als() c()ltvict(,(l u/F.397 I'l,C- anlj thev wcr.t: s(,n[(,nce(i lr

trnde.rgo Il.l. for a periot{ of 07 ),ears.

l 'fhe at'cust:cl Shahnau,az s/o Allah \{asaya anr.l Murtaza s/cr Nazrtr t1T"d y:r" also convicrect u/s.7(1)(h) oI Ai.A 1997 r./rv. Sct.rion 353/32.1 I'PC anrl they wel.e senkrncecl to unclt:r.go Il.l. Ior.a }.rr:riocl of 07 vcar.s u,itlr Iine of Its.50000/- cach ancl in clefault in lrayrner.rt of such finc,'tht,i,sh.rll undergo further S.I. for a periocl of 06 montl.ri.

'l-he accused Shahnawaz s/o AIlalr Wasal,a anr-l lvlurtaza s/o Nazt,t,r Ahmetl were also convicted u/s.25 of Sinclh Ar.nrs Act, 2013 arrcl thr:v r,r,t:rr sentenced to urldergo R.l. fot a periorl o[ 07 year.s r,r,ith fint, oI Iis.5i)0tttt/ cach ancl Lr default irr payn].r.,1 oI sudr fine, tltev slrall unclergo Iurthcr S.l Ior a l.rerior,i of Otr nronths.

Accust-.cl persolts wero also given be.nefit of Section 3ti2-lJ Cr.l,.(..

All the sentences were ortlerecl to r.un corlcur.rentlv.

2.lltr' brittl l.rcts {)f thc casc nr.(, tlt,lt olr Ifi ()9 l()21 Jl .rlrrrLrt 212[) lti,Lrr.s .ri llltx'l< N.. I, ctrlistau-c-[arrhar', K.rrac]ri .PP.sitt,r(ar..rr.rri t r.i'r,rsrtr.,r,ri, i,,rl.

Karachi tr'r'o robbc'r5 511nr1,.,t c()nrrlojr intcniion crutr, arprgrr op rr 11(rh)fr \ ( r\ No'l(11\-6?82 r...rkt'super [).*'t:r, [r].rcli c.r.r' rr;rri r.Lrberr r, srr.rlch.tr r r Irrarr, r

Mobilr.: I'h.r.rt: l'r'.rr.r thc c,.rplairrant l\,luharrrrratl ilairlcr. ,,\lihtar.rr ,rrrrirtrrr anrl hatl also srratchetl nrobilt: pholcs fi.orn 02 otiter Lryst.rrrrlcr.s. llr,, ctllll;rl.tirrarrt ancl othcr victints rtra(le hut arr,-l ,-Tv r.r ht,reuPorr tr r.olict, nrotril,, reachcrl tht'scenc ar.:rl orLi..rcll tht, r.olrLrt,rs l(l st()p [)Lrl tlrcV i.,rror.t,rl tlrt, poliL, tlilt'ctiorrs ar.rcl oPencel firctl uprrr.r tht,plrlirq' trllicrr.r. I\rlicL: olficials in r(trrrr, f ilt'ti ttl'rttt.t thc robLrr-rs rvho |cc;r.1i. irr jL6..rl alri l.qll tigrr,rr ir.p1t tltt,r t.r'totOrct,clt'. ()nc ol therrr disclost:rl his rr,,rnre.rs shalur,r,,r.az ll.onr \\lr(),r nrobilt,Ihr'rnt arrrl art urtlict,r.rs(,rl Pist()l ,..,,,.,, .,,a,,r.,,,-,,,., ,rnil tlrc otlrcr. ol, r-lisclost'rl hjs nlrttc as N4rrrt.rz.r Iron.t rVlr,.,nr .rrr rrniir,-,rrserl pistol .rn<i rrrrrlrilr pltorrc x,tre.tlso recor.,cr.ecl. Tltey u.t:r.c, arrt:sit,Ll on lht, spol an(j s(,nl t,r tlr!. hosl:rital ancl Llrc t-orrrplain.ltt (-iu.tlL, to tht, I,olice St.tlirrn rvlrr t.,, a f ore]t rt r.r tio|rcri Ir l lls r,r.crt: re11istt rt r.1 .t ga i ns t t ltcnr.

3.After usual irrvestigation the rnatter r,r,as challanetl ant tlrc appcllants t I

\.vere se ut up to-face trial. 'Ihey pleatlecl not guilt), antl claimcrl tri.r l.

4.h-r ortler to prove its case, the prosccutiolr examined thrce (t)3) I)\{s antl exhibited various items a.d other tlocument.s. 'fhe appellants irr their.3_12 Cr.P.C. statements clairnerl that they were innoct:rrt ancl fals.ly irnplit:atcii i, tl-rese cases. Neither of tl-re appellants gave evitlcnce on oath, howtvt.r., accused shahnawaz called two clefense witnesses bei.g rris ,rother antr iatrrer-.

l)age 2 ()l 4

T

n

5.After hearing the parties ancl apprcciating the eviclence on rec(lr'!1, i lr(, I learnetl trial Court convicted ancl sentenced tlre appellants as set ()tlt (..lfli(,j' ancl hcrrce, the appellants have filecl these appeals agailtst their C()ll V ic t i( )n \ ancl sentettces.

6.llrL' l.r,:ls.rrtrl cviclcncc'()l Ill(' aJs(, lt,trc hct'rr sct out in the llrrpLrgn('(l juilrlnrt,nt irr cir.,tajl an,.1 tltLrlL' js no ni,r'rl io r.1,1r;1r111111, i11,, samc irr oTtlt'r'lr avoiti rr nrrt,ct'ssa t't t t,itet i tiorr artr.1 rl tr pl ir..t t iL rn

7.,Alter re.rdinil out the cr,itlcrrct', lt,arrrt,rl courrst,l ior. thc trppell.1111,. urrrlt'r instructiorrs o[ thc.tppell.lrts st.rtct] lhat hr.' rlrrrrl,.{ n()t.rrlluc tlrr,t.,rsr, ,,r tlrt'ti[.ttttl that lhc appellalts rlpultl [r,s.rtisiit'tl rr itlt a ;t:.rsptr.rIrlL. r((iir(I()r irt st,rtlt,r'rcr,base,.l rtn the ioiiorvirrg triitillntirril .ir.cuntst.lnc(,s:-

i)'l'h.rt the rrppellan[s rvt'rt, fir.st tinr(, (ri:l(,n.]L'rs anc{ rr'l.rtir 1,1., v()ultg trell anrl ;r;.t, citiralrlt oI rt'Iorrtr,ttiort.

ii)'fhat thev arc tlre solt. lrtt'lrlrtinnt,rs ol tltt,il tar-r.riiit,s, rvhir rtlr r:tn tlteir inctxr.rr,.

iii)'lhirt rro pcrsolrs \rcr(' injLrlt,tl tlrrrinpl r()bLrcry ilr(1 (,nc()uni(,r r.r,ith the policc

1 iii) 'l hat the appellants lr1, 1i.(gP1i111, tht'ir r',trili Ir.rtl sltoi,.,n r,,t,nLr r, rClltorSC.

8.l-earnec'l Ac1c1l. Prosecution General Sincih submittccl that he has no obiectiol'l to a reasonable reduction in scntence based ou rnitigatitrl,, circumstances raised by the appellants.

9.\\r, h.:r,t: perusecl the recirrtl arr.l lin.l tlrat tltr.,.rccrrserl pcl.s{)ns \\.(,r.r. .lll('st('({ ott thc spot.rfter an cltc()Luli(,r ryiilt thr: ptrlir:c btrllt cri ,,r,ltrrnt u, r',. ittjtrrt'rl cLtrrtlitiott ttttcl ilrtnt l-rrlsscssion irl on,.' accusr:rl tt:r:ovcLr.r.i ,1 1111rL,ilc plronc r.r,lriclr r,vas snatchetl lrlonr tlrt' (.()nrpl,linant. Iloih the r.c(.ov(,r( rl unlic(,r'rsr(l pistols nt thtr scenr, of lltt, crintr, frr.o.ltrccrl a po5i1iy11 [rSl. r.,.,Irrrl r.r,irt'rr nr.tlcltecl u,ith thc trnPtics tc(()\;('l(.(l .tt tll(,sa('n(,arrtl that thcrt, u t,r't, f , , rlrajot' r'orrLrarlictjotls in .rrrt, of tht' pr()st'crrti0n r!itnt,ssr,s' cViclen,.t, i!lti. lr t'ettrrrit.rL'rl cousistcncc of all uraitrial points artr.l .rs such rr.r. fintl thai ilr,,

I

I []r()sccuti()lt has proveci its casc.rgitinst tltt,appt.llanls lrclorrr-l a lt.tson.rl,], tlottbt ,rtrtl uphol(l their con\,icti(),ts lloryt,r'r,r \\'ith tol,,ar!1 tt, the crrrrviclion. vr,t: fintl thal this cirse tloes rroL i..tll rvithitr tlrL'p1111i1,11, ol Section 3tl7 l'>['C lrrt l'rs( 3 ,,J 4

I

I

l:ilthel'Secti()n 392 rrf I)l)C on rvlriclL both tlrt, irppell.utts Ir.rcl arlt.tltr.rtc, rrrrlir,.'r,i suclt olit'ttct'. r\ntl as such appllll;11s arr-, c6nr ictr,tl rrrr,.ler. Sectiop lr]l J,l,( iusteati oi Scction 397 PlrC lor rvl.riclr tlrcv ilt.e ac(luilto(l l()r a pcri()(l (,1 0j i \'('.trs.

10.[]asecl on ,ritigating circumstances raiserl bv the appellants a^,.1 tlrt' rr, I objection given by the Aclcll. Prosecutor Ge^eral sirrdh to a rec-lucti., irr sentence rve herelry uphold the convictio,s of the appellants except witrr t"' respect to their convictions u/s.397 pIrC. I{orvever, rvith respect to tlrtrir- cotrviction u/s.392 PPC they are sente.cccl to urrtlergo R.l. for a perio(l ()r 03 yea,s. with regarcl to their sentence o/s.393/321 PpC their ser-rtenc. is rerlucecl to;r period of 03 vears with fine of Rs.50000/- each anci i. rlefatrit .i payment they shall further unclergo s.l. for' 0(r ,lonths. with regarrl r. th. conviction u/ s.25 o[ sincjh Arms Act, 2013 rr.e l1ereby retluce the sentenc(, ()l the appella.ts fi'om 07 years R.[. to 03 years I{.1. with firre of Rs.50000/- each and in tlefault of payment of such fi,e they shall further uncler.go for S.l. 0(r t rnoriths. The appellants shall have the be,efit of secti., 3g2-B Cr.p.C. anti arrr lemission applicable under the law a^cl the sentenc.s shall concur.r.e,tlv. ^rn

11.we ,rake it clear that the appellarrts are not co.victed untler tlrc A.ti- 'rerrorism Act,7997 as based on the evidence availablc. on recorci we fintl th.rt this case tloes not fall within the purview of ATA as there r,r,as no intenti.n .r. clcsign or purpose to create terror rather

i, ,uo, a robt:ery rt,hich r.r,as carriecl out by the appellants which cscalatecl into an encounter with tlrt, police in orcler to make their escape gooci.

"12. The i.stant C,iminal Appeals are clismisseri except as rnotrifieti ltl terrns of scntencing as mentioneci above.

il ll ,l

k

J--

C

fu* \1\"ti>o>f,.

JU y)< o'J/ i I

I'agc 4 ,i 4

T tl

I