ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

Cr. Revn. Appln. No.S-44   of   2021.

Date of Hearing

ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE

28.06.2021.

For direction.

Mr. Mumtaz Ali Jessar, advocate for the applicant.

Mr. Ali Anwar Kandhro, Addl. P.G.  

                             ---------------------

                   Applicant Aijaz son of Roshan alias Mohammad Uris Daryani was tried by learned II-Civil Judge & Judicial Magistrate, Mehar in Crl. Case No.58/2021. Vide judgment dated 23.4.2021 co-accused Ali Raza Chandio was acquitted; however, applicant Aijaz Daryani was convicted under Section 509, PPC and sentenced to 2 years R.I. and to pay the fine of Rs.25,000/-.  In the case of the default in payment of the fine he was ordered to suffer S.I. for one month. Applicant was further convicted under section 506/2, PPC and sentenced to 2 years R.I. and under Section 504, PPC for 2 months S.I.  Applicant preferred appeal being Cr. Appeal No.27/2021 before learned Additional Sessions Judge-I/MCTC, Dadu. Appeal was dismissed vide judgment dated 09.06.2021.  Thereafter, revision application was filed.  It has already been admitted for regular hearing and notice has been issued to the complainant as well as Addl. P.G.  Mr. Shahzado Sodhar advocate appeared on behalf of the complainant. 

                   Learned advocate for the applicant submits that sentence of 02 years is a short sentence and applicant Aijaz is in custody since 23.4.2021.  It is further stated that applicant Aijaz was on bail during the trial.  In support of his submissions, learned advocate for the applicant relied upon the case of Abdul Hameed v. Muhammad Abdullah and others (1999 SCMR 2589).

                   Mr. Ali Anwar Kandhro, learned Addl. P.G. recorded no objection.

                   In the case of Abdul Hameed (supra), Hon’ble Supreme Court has held as under:-

          “4.      On the other hand, Mr. S.M. Masud, learned Advocate Supreme court, for the petitioner, has urged that the learned Additional Sessions Judge without putting to the petitioner the notice as to the enhancement of the sentence and without hearing the arguments, enhanced the imprisonment for three years to five years and the amount of fine from Rs.5,000 to Rs.10,000.  Without going to the question, whether any notice was issued for the enhancement by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (as according to the State counsel such a notice was issued).  We are inclined to hold that since the sentence was short and as the sentence was enhanced by the learned Additional Sessions Judge from three years to five years, it was fit case in which the learned Judge in Chambers should have exercised the discretion in favour of the convict. We convert the above petition into appeal and admit the petitioner to bail in the sum of Rs.2,00,000 (two lacs) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.”

                   Since the two years is a short sentence. Hearing of the revision will take some time due to the huge pendency. Sentence of the applicant is suspended during pendency of the revision, subject to his furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.50,000/- and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of Additional Registrar of this Court.

                   It is made clear that revision application shall be heard on the next date.  To come up on 30.08.2021.

                                                                                                JUDGE

Qazi Tahir PA/*