ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT,

HYDERABAD.

Cr. R. A. No. S 130   of 2006.

DATE                                     ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE

24.04.2009.

PRESENT.

                                                Mr. Justice Muhammad Iabal Mahar.

FOR REGULAR HEARING.

Miss Kaneez Fatima Shaikh, Advocate for the applicant alongwith the applicant.

Mr. Hameedullah Dahiri, Advocate for the State.

MUHAMMAD IQBAL MAHAR, J.-            The applicant has been convicted by the trial court under Section 269, 270, 272 and 273 PPC on admission of his guilt under section 243 Cr.P.C. and sentenced for six months R.I. and fine of Rs.1000/- and in default to further undergo S.I. for 15 days vide Judgment dated 25.9.2006. The conviction and sentence was impugned before the Sessions Judge Hyderabad, who also dismissed the appeal and maintained the punishment awarded by the learned trial court to the applicant. Hence this revision application.

            Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

Learned counsel for the applicant at the very outset submits that the applicant had admitted his guilt yet the learned trial court as well as the appellate court awarded the maximum punishment. She further contends that the applicant being first offender has realized his mistake and repents and has undertaken not to repeat such an offence in future, as he wants to reform and rehabilitate himself as a respectable citizen. Learned counsel further submits that she would not press this criminal revision application and prays that a lenient view may be taken and the conviction and sentence awarded to the applicant be modified to the extent which already undergone by him. She relied upon an unreported case Cr.R.A No.S-113 of 2006.

On the other hand the learned State counsel submits that the applicant remained in Jail for about 2½  months and has served a substantive period of his sentence, therefore, very candidly concedes to the disposal of this criminal revision application with the modification of the sentence to that of already undergone.

            In view of the above, I am of the view that the ends of justice would be served if the sentence of the applicant is reduced to one already undergone. Further, in the cited case in similar circumstances this court has taken lenient view. Therefore, I while dismissing this criminal revision application as not pressed and by maintaining the conviction, reduce the sentence from six months R.I. and fine of Rs.1000- to that of already undergone.

            The applicant present on bail his bail bond and surety stands discharged.

            Revision dismissed.

                                                                                    JUDGE

A.