Case Details

Citation(s)
2020 SLG 1056 2020 SLD 1056 2020 MLD 548
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 58 of 2014, heard on 25th September, 2019, Date of hearing: 25th September, 2019.
MUHAMMAD TARIQ ABBASI, JUSTICE RAJA SHAHID MAHMOOD ABBASI, JUSTICE
Naveed Ahmed Warraich, DDPP with Sohail, Inspector for the State. Rao Abdur Raheem for
Respondents Nos. 4 and 5.

STATE THROUGH PROSECUTOR GENERAL PUNJAB

VS

NASEEB SHAH AND 5 OTHERS

Law: Explosive Substances Act, 1908

Section: 4,5,7

Law: Anti Terrorism Act, 1997

Section: 7,19(8-B)

Explosive Substances Act (VI of 1908)--- ----Ss. 4, 5 & 7---Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Ss. 7 & 19(8-B)---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 417---Act of terrorism---Attempt to cause explosion or making or keeping explosive with intent to endanger life or property, making or possessing explosives under suspicious circumstances---Appeal against acquittal---Restriction on trial of offences---Failure of prosecution to apply for consent of Provincial Government---Effect---Accused persons were charged under S. 5 of Explosive Substances Act, 1908---Sanction of the Provincial Government under S. 7 of Explosive Substances Act, 1908 for holding trial was mandatory and a condition precedent for prosecution of the accused persons---Entire proceedings, in the absence of requisite sanction/permission, were void and without jurisdiction---Word "shall" used in S. 7 of Explosive Substances Act, 1908 left no room for any departure therefrom---Section 19(8-B), Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, however, made a relaxation to the effect that if sanction was applied but not granted by the competent authority within 30 days then the due proceedings towards initiation of trial could be carried on---Section 19(8-B), Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 required the request for prosecution to have been made---When there was mention of receipt of consent or sanction within thirty days, it impliedly indicated to sending and seeking consent/sanction---No such request having been made, prosecution and trial under S. 7 of Explosive Substances Act, 1908 and S. 19(8-B) of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 was not competent and possible---Such fact alone was sufficient to give premium of acquittal to the accused persons---Impugned was not open to any exception and as such did not warrant any interference---Appeal against acquittal was dismissed. JUDGMENT MUHAMMAD TARIQ ABBASI, J.---Through this appeal, the State has challenged acquittal of the respondents, recorded through judgment dated 20.12.2013, passed by the learned Judge, Anti Terrorism Court-II, Rawalpindi Division, Rawalpindi. 2. Notices to the respondents were issued and in consequence thereof respondents Nos. 4 and 5 had entered appearance.…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492