IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, AT KARACHI
Criminal Appeal No. 303 of 2020
Criminal Jail Appeal No. 307 of 2020
Appellants: Hayat
Shah @ Sheena, Taj Muhammad @ Qabu and Habibullah through Mr. Ajab Khan Khattak
advocate
The State: Through
Mr. Khadim Hussain, Additional Prosecutor General Sindh
Date of hearing: 28.11.2022
Date of judgment: 28.11.2022
J U D G M E N T
IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J- The facts in brief necessary for disposal of
instant appeals are that the appellants with rest of the culprits in
furtherance of their common intention are alleged to have committed murder of
Rustam Khan Jamali, for that they were booked and reported upon. On conclusion
of trial, co-accused Kamran and Abdul Hafeez were acquitted, while the
appellants were convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 20
years with fine of Rs.30,000/- each and in default whereof to undergo simple
imprisonment for 06 months with benefit of section 382(b) Cr.P.C vide judgment
dated 19.09.2015, by IV-Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi South, same on having been impugned was set aside by
this Court on 13.03.2020 with direction to learned trial Court to correct the
sentence under the law, consequently, the sentence was corrected and appellants
were convicted under Section 302(b) PPC and sentenced to undergo life
imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.30,000/- each to the legal heirs of the
deceased and in default whereof to undergo simple imprisonment for 03 months
with benefit of section 382(b) Cr.P.C by learned trial Court vide judgment
dated 09.04.2020, which is impugned by the appellants before this Court by
preferring two separate appeals.
2. At the very outset, it is pointed out by
learned counsel for the appellants and learned Addl. P.G for the state that on
having impugned the judgment of learned trial Court was impliedly set aside by
this Court with direction to learned trial Court, to correct the sentence, such
correction was to have been made by recording fresh findings in terms of
Section 367 Cr.P.C, which has not been done by learned trial Court, which has
rendered the impugned judgment to be illegal which has prejudiced the rights of
the appellants/state seriously. By pointing out so, they sought for remand of
the case to learned trial Court to re-write the judgment by recording fresh
findings independently as mandated by section 367 Cr.P.C.
3. Heard arguments and perused the record.
4. The suggestion advanced by the learned
counsel for the parties takes support from the record; consequently, the
impugned judgment is set aside with direction to learned trial Court to
re-write the same afresh by recording fresh findings, strictly in terms of
Section 367 Cr.P.C, preferably within 03 months after receipt of copy of this
judgment.
5. The appellants are present in Court on
bail, they to enjoy the same concession, subject to furnishing fresh surety in
sum of Rs.100,000/- (Rupees One Lac) each and P.R bond in the like amount to
the satisfaction of learned trial Court.
6. The
instant appeals are disposed of accordingly.
JUDGE