The anti-terrorism court acquitted the man in two cases involving possession of explosives and illegal weapons.
Abdul Mubeen alias Mubeen was charged with possession of an unlicensed 9mm pistol and a hand grenade in the jurisdiction of the Kalri police station in May this year.
Magistrate ATC-XVII, who presided over the trial at the Central Jail Judicial Complex, announced his order after recording the evidence and closing arguments of both sides. The judge stated that the prosecution did not prove the allegations against the accused at all.
The judge pointed out flaws in the investigation, saying the prosecution was silent on the time of the arrest and the police did not accept any private person as a witness.
“It is pertinent to note that IO Liaquat and ASI Habib did not ask the accused from where the accused got such alleged hand grenade and 9mm pistol and where did he go and all these facts put a crack in the prosecution story and insufficient evidence (was placed) to link the accused with the crime he was charged with,” he noted.
The judge said the way the prosecution’s story was told appeared to be beyond doubt. “False framing of the accused in the above circumstances could not be decided. I have no hesitation in stating that the prosecution has failed miserably in establishing the guilt of the accused beyond any reasonable shadow of doubt,” he said. The judge acquitted the accused by giving him the benefit of the doubt and ordered the prison authorities to release him immediately unless he is required in another case.
According to the prosecution, on May 15, 2024, a police patrol signaled the accused on a motorcycle to stop at Mauripur Road, Lyari. During the search, one 9mm pistol and a hand grenade were found on him. The accused did not present a gun license.
Defense counsel Hyder Farooq Jatoi argued that the accused is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case. He said the prosecution could not present any evidence to support its allegations against his client, adding that there were serious inconsistencies in the testimony of prosecution witnesses.
He therefore asked the judge to acquit the accused for lack of evidence.
Two separate cases were filed under Section 23(i)A of the Sindh Arms Act and 4/5 of the Explosive Substances Act read with Section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act.
