1995 P Cr (PLP)

Writ Petition No.8961 of 1994, decided on 31st August 1994. Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) Act (XV of 1975)

S. 4

Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199

One of the accused being armed with a Klashnikov during the incident, Sessions Court had rightly held that the Special Court constituted under the Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) Act, 1975, was only competent to try the scheduled offence-- Sessions Court, however, was not competent to dispose of the matter and it should have sent back the case to the Special Court which had earlier held that the case was not tribal by it

Said order of the Special Court was consequently set aside by High Court and the complaint case and the challan were directed to be sent to Special Court for trial in accordance with law. MA. Zafar for Petitioner Malik M. Aslam for Respondents. Date of hearing: 31st August 1994. RAJA AFRASIAB KHAN, J: Through this Constitution petition, the petitioner, Ahmad Khan, has challenged the validity of order, dated 14-2-1994 passed by the learned Special Court No.3 (Suppression of Terrorists Activities), Lahore, holding that the case in hand was not tribal by him. Alternatively, it is prayed that this petition may be treated as a revision petition and accordingly a direction may be issued to the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sheikhupura, to decide the complaint of the petitioner on merits, by setting aside the order, dated 19-7-1994. The learned State counsel has no objection to the grant of second prayer made by the learned counsel. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sheikhupura, vide his order, dated 19-7-1994 clearly observed that he had no jurisdiction because the offence committed by the accused was scheduled one. It was noted that the learned Special Court constituted under the Suppression of Terrorists Activities Act, 1975, was the only competent forum to entertain and decide the aforesaid complaint. This being so, the only appropriate course open to the learned Additional Sessions Judge was to have sent the case to the learned competent! Court for its trial. It is established that one of the accused, namely, Muhammad Amin was armed with a Klashnikov during the incident. This fact ' was not disputed by the learned Law Officer. In other words, in the given facts and circumstances, the learned Additional Sessions Judge was right to hold that the learned Special Court, constituted under the provisions of Suppression A of Terrorists Activities Act, 1975, was the only competent Court to try this scheduled offence. He, however, was not competent to dispose of the matter. He should have sent back the case for its trial to the learned competent Court. The order, dated 19-7-1994 stands modified to that extent. The order, dated 14-2-1994, passed by the learned Special Court shall be deemed to have been recalled in the interest of justice. In consequence, the complaint case and the challan case would be sent to the learned Special Court (Suppression of Terrorists Activities), Lahore, for their trial in accordance with law, with this observation, this petition stands disposed of. N.H.Q./A-721/L Order accordingly.