Citation Name: 2025 MLD 1096 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Ameer Jan alias Bablu vs State Ss

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Citation Name: 2025 MLD 1096 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Ameer Jan alias Bablu VS State Ss. 4 & 5---Sindh arms act (V of 2013), S. 23---anti-Terrorism act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7---Keeping explosive with intent to endanger life or property, possessing explosives under suspicious circumstances, possession of illicit weapons, act of terrorism---appreciation of evidence---Sentence, modification of---Prosecution case was that three rifle grenades, two ball bombs and .30-bore pistol along with magazine loaded with three bullets were recovered from the possession of accused---In the instant case, it was a matter of record that three rifle grenades allegedly recovered from possession of the appellant were without launcher, hence the same were not capable of explosion causing an injury to any person or damage to any property to attract the definition of "explosive" provided under S.2 (f) of the act of 1997---Moreover, it also could not produce a practical effect by explosion or pyrotechnic effect, being incomplete preassembled firearm ammunition and device in terms of "explosives" as defined under S.4 (1) of the Explosive act, 1884---Hence, S.6 (2)(ee) of the act of 1997, punishable under S.7(ff) ibid was not applicable to the facts of the case---admitted position that in the instant case, the appellant had not done any act and/or had in his possession and under his control the alleged explosive substance with intent to cause an explosion of a nature likely to endanger life or to cause serious injury to property, to attract the provisions of S.4 of the act of 1908---alleged explosive substance hand grenades without launcher had no characteristic of exploding to endanger life or to cause serious injury to property etc---Since only the possession of the alleged hand grenades without launcher with the appellant had been established, the alleged act squarely fell within the ambit of S.5 of the act of 1908, which carried punishment up to 14 years---Conviction and sentence recorded for the offence under S.7(ff) of the act of 1997 was set aside, in circumstance---Since the appellant was not previously convicted of any offence, thus, he was given an opportunity for reformation---Therefore, the Court deemed it appropriate not to award him maximum punishment provided under S.5 of the act of 1908 and awarded him sentence to suffer R.I. for three (3) years---However, conviction and sentence awarded to the appellant under S.23(1)(a) of the act of 2013 by the Trial Court was maintained---appeal was dismissed with said modification in sentences.

Citation Name: 2025 MLD 1096 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case Ameer Jan alias Bablu vs State Ss — 2025 MLD 1096 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 MLD