ANAS ABDUL RASHID MACHISWALA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS all the appeals involve common question of law and arise from the common judgment rendered in POTA Case No. 7 of 2003 and 9 of 2003, they are heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) IT is pertinent to note that Criminal Appeal Nos. 1148 of 2006, 1149 of 2006, 1150 of 2006, 1151 of 2006 and 1155 of 2006 are preferred by the appellants who are convicted by the Special [POTA] Court and sentenced under Section 3[1] of the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 [POTA for short] to undergo RI for a period of ten years and fine of Rs. 5000/- each, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year; under Section 3[3] of POTA to undergo RI for a period of eight years and fine of Rs. 3000/- each and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year; under Section 4 read with Sec.3[3] of the POTA to undergo RI for a period of five years and fine of Rs.3000/- each and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months. The above appellants are also convicted and sentenced under Section 120B of Indian Penal Code [IPC for short] to rigorous imprisonment for a period of eight years and fine of Rs.3000/- each, in default, they are ordered to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year; under Section 120-B read with Section 307 of IPC RI for a period of ten years and fine of Rs. 5000/- each and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year; under Section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, all the five appellants are imposed simple imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of Rs.2000/- each and in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months; under Section 4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, they are sentenced to rigorous imprisonment of two years and fine of Rs.3000/- each, in default to undergo further simple imprisonment of six months; under Section 4 of the Explosive Substance Act, the appellants are sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and to pay fine of Rs.3000/- and in default, to undergo further simple imprisonment for one year and; under Section 135[1] of the Bombay Police Act, they are punished for a period of three months and to pay fine of Rs.500/- each and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month. Five appellants who are convicted and sentenced under the various provisions of POTA Act as well as IPC, Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, Explosive Substance Act and under the Bombay Police Actby a judgment rendered in Special POTA Case Nos. 7 and 9 of 2003 respectively have preferred the present appeals challenging the conviction and imposition of sentence by the Special Judge [POTA] vide judgment and order dated 12th May, 2006 passed in Special POTA case Nos. 7 and 9 of 2003; whereas the State has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 1686 of 2006 challenging the judgment and order passed by the Special Judge [POTA] in Special POTA Case No. 7 and 9 of 2003 respectively for enhancement of the sentence imposed by the learned Special Judge [POTA] on the present appellants.

(3.) MS. Nitya Ramakrishnan, learned counsel appearing with Mr. Rohit S. Verma with Mr. Somnath M. Vatsa for the appellants made following submissions in respect of each appellant of each Criminal Appeal. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF AHMED HUSSAIN ALLARAKHA MANSURI, APPELLANT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1155 OF 2006 [ORIGINAL ACCUSED NO. 18 IN POTA CASE NO. 7 OF 2003 AND ORIGINAL ACCUSED NO. 21 IN POTA CASE NO. 8 OF 2003]: