( 1 ) CRIMINAL Appeal No. 1156 of 2004 has been filed by the appellant-Kirtibhai Madhavlal Joshi, original accused No. 4 in P. O. T. A. Case No. 3 of 2004, Criminal Appeal No. 1157 of 2004 has been filed by the appellant-Mahesh Narsidas Patel, original accused No. 1 in P. O. T. A. case no. 5 of 2004 (supplementary charge- sheet) and Criminal Appeal No. 1156 of 2004 has been filed by the appellant-Prahladbhai Prabhudas Patel, original accused No. 3 in P. O. T. A. Case No. 3 of 2004 against the common order dated 11-5-2004 passed by the learned Special Judge (P. O. T. A.) below Exhs. 105, 106 and 107 in Special (P. O. T. A.) Case No. 3 of 2004 and Exh. 2 in special (P. O. T. A.) Case No. 5 of 2004 whereby the applications filed by the present appellants accused and accused No:. 1 and 2 namely, Mohamed Yasin ibrahim Noor and accused Mohamed Kasim Mohamed Yasin Noor for discharge under Sec. 227 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as "the Code" for short) and Sec. 33 of the Prevention of Terrorism Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short) were rejected.

( 2 ) IT may be stated at this stage that in all five accused have preferred applications before the learned Special P. O. T. A. Court for discharge and same have been disposed of by way of aforesaid common order.

( 3 ) AGAINST the said order, accused Nos. 1 and 2 of P. O. T. A. Case No. 3 of 2004 namely, Mohamed Yasin Ibrahim Noor and Mohamed Kasim Mohamed yasin Noor had jointly preferred appeal being Criminal Appeal No. 1284 of 2004. However, at the end of arguments, learned Advocate, Mr. A. P. Shah, appearing for the said appellants-accused Nos. 1 and 2 sought permission of the Court to withdraw the same. Hence, said appeal was disposed of as withdrawn by this Court vide order dated 24-2-2006 after giving opportunity of hearing to learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties.

( 4 ) IT is to be noted that the present Criminal Appeals have been converted from Special Criminal Application Nos. 650, 651 and 652 of 2004 respectively. These are very old matters of the year 2004 and could not be disposed of till date and as per the present roster, they have been reflected in our board.

( 5 ) AS these three appeals arose out of the common order dated 11-5-2004 passed by the learned Special Judge (P. O. T. A.) below Exhs. 105, 106 and 107 in Special (P. O. T. A.) Case No. 3 of 2004 and Exh. 2 in Special (P. O. T. A.)Case No. 5 of 2004, they have been heard together and are being decided by way of this common judgment and order.

( 6 ) THE facts in short are that a secret information was received by the commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad, from Intelligence Agency about the activity of a person namely, Yasin Ibrahim Noor, settled in Dubai and doing terrorist activity in the State of Gujarat by being a member of lashker-E-Toiba and also running the network in India by keeping contact with the agency in Pakistan, and therefore, said information was handed over to Joint Commissioner of Police, crime Branch. Therefore, a special team was formed and investigation started in that direction. Meanwhile, Joint Police Commissioner, Crime Branch, ahmedabad, received an anonymous letter with a cassette giving details of activities of Yasin Noor. On listening the said cassette, since it was found that one person from Dubai namely, Prem, was contacting one Raval at Dubai about the bomb-blasts which had taken place at Ghatkopar in Mumbai, attention ot senior Police Officers was drawn that the person named Prem and the person named in the anonymous letter is one and the same and is actively involved in the terrorist activities According to prosecution, Prem is the alias name of yasin Noor On 4-11-2003, through a secret informant, an information was received to the effect that Yasm Noor and his son Kasim Noor of Al-Habib flat, Juhapura, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, were keeping illegal arms and ammunition and they are trying to remove them from the said flat