JUDGMENT : Tashi Rabstan, J. 1. Through the medium of instant appeal, appellants are seeking setting aside of judgment and order dated 09.09.2013 passed by learned Principal Sessions Judge, Jammu, by virtue of which accused appellants have been found guilty of following offences: (i) 14 Foreigner's Act, 5 Explosive Substances Act, and 7/25 Arms Act; and (ii) Order of awarding following sentences to each: (a) Rigorous imprisonment for a period of ten years for the offence under Section 7/25 Arms Act; (b) Rigorous imprisonment for a period of 7 years and a fine of Rs. 10,000/- for commission of offence under Section 14 Foreigner's Act and to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months in default of payment of fine. (c) Rigorous imprisonment for a period of 5 years under Section 5 Explosive Substances Act. The facts, emanating from the record of appeal, are that on the basis of information received by one Mamta Sharma, Dy. S.P. Operation, Jammu on 21.12.2008 that some militants were about to strike Jammu and they had hidden at some Hotel in Jammu. Accordingly, she along with other persons of SOG started searching and during search at Hotel Samrat, Jammu, she found that some militants were staying there. On inquiry, they disclosed their names and from their search large number of arms and ammunition were received. On this, FIR No. 87/2008, dated 21.12.2008, was got registered in Police Station, Bus Stand, Jammu, which presented a challan under Section 4/5 ESA. 3EAO, 3/7/25 Arms Act against all the accused and trial commenced against them. 2. As per prosecution story, allegations against the accused-appellants are that on 21.12.2008 on the basis of docket received on behalf of Ms. Mamta Sharma, Dy. S.P. Operation whereby she had received information from reliable sources that some Pakistani Militants had entered in the State of Jammu and Kashmir after arming themselves with modern arms and ammunition and are staying in some Hotels at Jammu in order to commit a big incident. She alongwith other Jawans of Special Operation Group started searching the Hotels and during search of Samrat Hotel, near Bus Stand, accused-appellants were found in Room No. 23 of the said Hotel and on inquiry, they disclosed their names as Ghulam Farid, Mohd. Imran and Mohd. She alongwith other Jawans of Special Operation Group started searching the Hotels and during search of Samrat Hotel, near Bus Stand, accused-appellants were found in Room No. 23 of the said Hotel and on inquiry, they disclosed their names as Ghulam Farid, Mohd. Imran and Mohd. Abdullah and from their search, one AK-Rifle with two loaded magazines in which there were 56 live cartridges and two hand grenades were also recovered from the accused, namely, Ghulam Farid, whereas one pistol with loaded magazine having six live cartridges and one hand grenade wore recovered from accused, namely, Mohd. Imran, and one Pistol along with one magazine, having six live cartridges and one hand grenade were recovered from accused, namely, Mohd. Abdullah. All the accused belonged to Jesh-e-Mohd. Militants Organization and had entered into the State to spread militant activities and cause damage to the vital installations of Army and Police. Thereafter FIR No. 87/2008 for commission of offences falling under Sections 4/5ESA/14F.Act/3EAO/3/7/25 Arms Act was registered against them. SHO concerned went on spot and seized the already seized arms and ammunition and prepared the site plan also. The report of bomb disposal squad was obtained regarding the hand grenades and after defusing them, they were sealed and sent to FSL for examination, whereas the sealed weapons were got examined by the Armory Work Shop, Police Line, Jammu. During investigation, it was found that accused were residents of Pakistan where they got extensive training in handling the modern weapons and thereafter entered into India through Bangladesh and when they reached Calcutta, they met one person, namely, Deepak, who handed over the arms, ammunition and grenades to them and they reached Jammu by train and stayed in Samrat Hotel, from where they were arrested by SOG. They had come to India with the sole purpose of starting Jihad against the Country in order to endanger its sovereignty and disintegrate it and to commit genocide of innocent people. After investigation, final report was submitted and vide order dated 10.11.2010, accused-appellants were charged for commission of offences falling under Section 120-13 RPC/4/5 ESA 3/7/25 Arms Act/14 Foreigner's Act and 3 EAO to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried, 3. After investigation, final report was submitted and vide order dated 10.11.2010, accused-appellants were charged for commission of offences falling under Section 120-13 RPC/4/5 ESA 3/7/25 Arms Act/14 Foreigner's Act and 3 EAO to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried, 3. In sustenance of charges levelled against the accused-appellants, fifteen prosecution witnesses crossed the witness box and their statements were recorded and thereafter statements of accused-appellants recorded in terms of Section 342 Cr.P.C. and they denied allegations leveled against them. However, they have not led any evidence in defence. 4. Learned Trial Court, after thorough trial, convicted accused appellants under Sections 14 Foreigner's Act, 5 Explosive Substances Act, and 7/25 Arms Act and ordered awarding of following sentences to each: (a) Rigorous imprisonment for a period often years for the offence under Section 7/25 Arms Act; (b) Rigorous imprisonment for a period of 7 years and a fine of Rs. 10,000/- for commission of offence under Section 14 F. Act and to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months in default of payment of fine. (c) Rigorous imprisonment for a period of 5 years under Section 5 Explosive Substances Act. 5. Against the aforesaid conviction and sentence present appeal has been preferred on the grounds set out in it. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 7. Accused-appellants are involved in heinous offence against Nation and accordingly convicted and sentenced under Sections 14 Foreigner's Act, 5 Explosive Substances Act and 7/25 Arms Act. Learned counsel for the accused-appellants has stated that Trial Court has passed order of conviction and sentence without proper application of mind and simply on presumptions and assumptions only. The evidence of prosecution relied upon by the Court is highly improbable, incredible, full of contradictions, insufficient and not cogent enough to hold accused-appellants guilty of commission of any of offences. He avers that appellants are quite innocent. The statements of prosecution witnesses have not been properly appreciated by the trial Court in a legal, judicious and appropriate manner to find out the truth and it has caused a miscarriage of justice, states counsel. Learned counsel further submits that conviction and sentence awarded to the accused-appellants is unwarranted, without proof of their involvement and is not based even on any iota of evidence. Learned counsel further submits that conviction and sentence awarded to the accused-appellants is unwarranted, without proof of their involvement and is not based even on any iota of evidence. His further contention is that even prosecution has miserably failed to prove that accused appellants were enemy agents and they were working for enemies of this Country and that recovery and seizure memo of arms and ammunition recovered from the accused appellants have not been proved beyond doubt and the independent witnesses have not been associated with seizure and recovery. He also avers that there are material contradictions in the statements of official witnesses and they cannot be believed without any corroboration which is lacking in the present case. Lastly, he contends that in peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, accused-appellants have undergone more than 08 years and 04 months, therefore, it would be appropriate that period of sentence awarded to them may be modified to the extent already undergone and they be directed to be pushed back to their Country of origin. 8. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent-State has strenuously asserted that prosecution has fully proved its case against accused by recovery of prohibited arms and ammunition from them and it has further proved that they are residents of Pakistan and the statements of official witnesses cannot be disbelieved when they have no motive to implicate the accused in a frivolous case. Learned counsel submits that prosecution, thus, succeeded in proving beyond any reasonable shadow of doubt that prohibited arms and ammunition recovered from accused appellants were in working condition and high explosive substances were recovered from them, which were to be used by them to intensify the militant activities in the State by causing extensive loss of life and property by exploding the explosive substance. 9. Accused-appellants have been charged for commission of offence falling under Sections 120-B RPC/4/5/ESA, 3/7/25 Arms Act/14 F. Act and 3 EAO. So far offence under section 3 EAO is concerned, accused did not come, within the definition of Enemy Agent Ordinance as defined therein. Learned' Trial Court has rightly held so that they are residents of Pakistan, so no offence under EAO was proved against them. So far offence under section 3 EAO is concerned, accused did not come, within the definition of Enemy Agent Ordinance as defined therein. Learned' Trial Court has rightly held so that they are residents of Pakistan, so no offence under EAO was proved against them. Accused-appellants have been further charged for commission of offence falling under Section 14 Foreigner's Act and the allegations against the accused-appellants are that they came to India without any valid passport which amount to violation of Section 14 of the Foreigner's Act. This allegation has been proved by the accused appellants themselves who have admitted in their statements recorded under Section 342 Cr.P.C. that they are residents of Pakistan. All the prosecution witnesses examined in the case have proved the fact that the accused appellants were residents of Pakistan and they came to this State without any valid permission for which they could not give any satisfactory reply when asked. Hence, offence under Section 14 Foreigner's Act has rightly been proved against them. 10. Accused-appellants were further charged for commission of offence falling under Section 4/5 Explosive Substance Act. It is the case of prosecution that on 21.12.2008, accused checked in a Room No. 23 situated in the basement of Hotel Samrat, where the Special Operation Group headed by Mamta Sharma Dy. S.P. conducted raid and apprehended the accused appellants. From the luggage of the accused appellants, arms and ammunition and three hand grenades were recovered and those hand grenades were later on defused and after sealing them, were sent to FSL for chemical examination which on examination found that those hand grenades contained Tri Nitro Toluene (TNT), a high explosive substance and same chemical was detected in live grenades. According to him, if exploded can cause huge loss of life and property. 11. Learned counsel for the accused has argued that prosecution story cannot be believed on the statements of the official witnesses only and independent witnesses though available on the spot, have not been examined in this case. The prosecution has examined all the witnesses to the recovery, seizure and arrest of accused appellants who are all police witnesses but this is not a general rule that evidence of police witnesses cannot be believed in order to base conviction on the accused, especially when they have no motive to implicate them in a false case. 12. The prosecution has examined all the witnesses to the recovery, seizure and arrest of accused appellants who are all police witnesses but this is not a general rule that evidence of police witnesses cannot be believed in order to base conviction on the accused, especially when they have no motive to implicate them in a false case. 12. Learned trial Judge, analyzing the material on record had come to hold that accused were residents of Pakistan and had no valid documents to be in India. In their statements, accused-appellants had admitted that they are not residents of this Country but of Pakistan and have also not disputed that they were not having passport or visa and they were of Pakistan Nationality. Thus, the offence under the said Act has been held to be proved and in my considered opinion, the offence under the said Act has been proved beyond reasonable doubt. 13. In view of aforesaid analysis, in my considered view that the grounds assailing the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence have no legal substantiality and, accordingly, the same are rejected. 14. The factual situation of the instant case compels me to state that this kind of activities by anyone breeds lawlessness, fear and affects the fundamental unity of our great Country. A nation with a desire to prosper is required to maintain high degree of law and order situation apart from respecting "imperatives of internationalism". Certain individuals harbouring unacceptable ideas and inexcusable philosophy and, on certain occasions, because of huge avarice, try to jeopardize the consistent and collegial fabric of the State. This leads to national decay and gives rise to incomprehensible anarchy. It reflects non-reverence for humanity. Be it categorically stated, every citizen of this Country is required to remember that national patriotism is founded on the philosophy of public good. Love for one's country and humanity at large are eternally cherished values. The infamous acts of appellants are really condemnable not only because of the dent they intended to create in the social peace and sovereignty of the nation, but also from the humane point of view as they are founded on greed, envy, baseless anger, pride, prejudice and perverse feelings towards mankind. 15. The infamous acts of appellants are really condemnable not only because of the dent they intended to create in the social peace and sovereignty of the nation, but also from the humane point of view as they are founded on greed, envy, baseless anger, pride, prejudice and perverse feelings towards mankind. 15. I have, in agony and anguish, expressed this because when a devastating activity like the present one occurs it injures the nationality, disturbs the equilibrium of each individual citizen, creates a concavity in the equanimity of the peace of the State, generates a stir in the sanctity and divinity of law and order situation which is paramount in any civilized State, attempts to endanger the economic growth of a country and, in the ultimate eventuate, destroys the conceptual normalcy of any habitat. Law cannot remain silent to this because it is the duty of law to resist such attacks on peace. It is manifest that accused-appellants had conspired to spread militant activities, aiming at causing damage to vital installations of army and police. The great country, like ours, cannot succumb to this kind of terrorist activity as it is nationally as well as internationally obnoxious. Such tolerance would tantamount to acceptance of defeat. The iron hand of law has to fall and in the obtaining facts and circumstances, as the charges have been proved beyond reasonable doubt, the law has rightly visited the accused-appellants and, accordingly, I concur with the same. Viewed thus, this appeal, being bereft of any merit, is dismissed along with connected MP(s). Send down the record.