MUHAMMAD KHAN ALIAS AKHTAR MUHAMMAD vs STATE — 2026 PCrLJ 548 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

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

MUHAMMAD KHAN ALIAS AKHTAR MUHAMMAD VS STATE. Ss. 265-K, 435 & 439---Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Ss. 11-F, 11-H, 11-J, 11-I, 11-K, 11-N & 7---Prohibition of acts intended or likely to stir up sectarian hatred, membership, support and meetings relating to a proscribed organization, collecting funds for a proscribed organization, act of terrorism---Acquittal of accused at any stage of trial---Scope. The petitioner was accused in a case registered under the relevant provisions of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 and the Pakistan Penal Code. The petitioner filed an application under S.265-K, Cr.P.C. for his acquittal at the trial stage, which was dismissed by the Trial Court. Validity---The record transpired that on the basis of secret information, the officials of Counter Terrorism Department conducted a raid at the flat of the petitioner, where they found the petitioner counting a huge quantity of Pakistani currency. The search of the flat was conducted, which resulted in recovery of cash amounting to Rs.108,10101/-, record of several bank accounts, 26 cheque books, ATM cards and other relevant material. Besides, the petitioner (accused), being an active facilitator of a proscribed organization i.e. Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan ("TTP"), was also involved in collecting donations and extortion money from different sources including Afghanistan, where he had another office from where his co-accomplice also sent money. Under such circumstances, the question of innocence or guilt of the petitioner could only be determined after a full-fledged trial and examination of prosecution witnesses. The provisions of Ss.265-K and 561-A, Cr.P.C. should not normally be pressed into service for deciding the fate of a criminal case, particularly when apparently there existed a probability of conviction after recording evidence. In the present case, the petitioner (accused) was arrested at the spot and not only huge quantity of Pakistani currency was recovered from his possession, but also record of 26 bank accounts, ATM cards and ledger were recovered. The First Information Report was lodged promptly by nominating the petitioner and assigning a specific role to him by the complainant. Even under the law, in such like cases, the sole testimony of a complainant could be sufficient for conviction if it was found truthful and confidence inspiring. As such, the Trial Court had rightly exercised its jurisdiction by refusing the application under S.265-K, Cr.P.C., as sufficient material and evidence was available on record connecting the petitioner with the commission of offence. The petitioner could not claim benefit of his acquittal in another case, as the entire facts and circumstances of the said case were altogether different from the case in hand. The petitioner failed to point out any illegality, irregularity or jurisdictional defect in the order passed by the Trial Court requiring interference by the High Court. The petition, being without merit and not maintainable, was dismissed accordingly.

MUHAMMAD KHAN ALIAS AKHTAR MUHAMMAD vs STATE — 2026 PCrLJ 548 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTAN

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 PCRLJ