IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, AT KARACHI

Criminal Jail Appeal No. 385 of 2021

Appellant: Shan Gill through Mr. Habib-ur-Rehman Jiskani advocate

The State: Through Mr. Khadim Hussain, Additional Prosecutor General Sindh

Date of hearing: 26.10.2022

Date of judgment: 26.10.2022

J U D G M E N T

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J- It is alleged that appellant with one more culprit robbed complainant Muhammad Zeeshan of his cell phone and then was apprehended at the spot by the police party on duty when was about to make his escape good therefrom, for that he was booked and reported upon. On conclusion of trial, he was convicted under Section 397 PPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 07 years with benefit of section 382(b) Cr.P.C by learned X-Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi South vide judgment dated 18.06.2021, which is impugned by the appellant before this Court by preferring the instant jail appeal.

2. At the very outset, it is stated by the learned counsel for the appellant that no weapon was used by the appellant in commission of the incident, therefore, the offence at the most would fall under Section 392 PPC, therefore, he would not press disposal of instant appeal on merits, provided the sentence awarded to the appellant is reduced to one which he has already undergone by modifying the penal section, which is not opposed by learned Addl. PG for the State.

3. Admittedly, no weapon was used by the appellant in commission of incident, as such, the offence, if any, would fall under Section 392 PPC, therefore, the appellant for an offence punishable u/s 397 PPC is misplaced, thus, it is modified to one u/s 392 PPC, consequently, the appellant is convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 03 years with fine of Rs.30,000/- and in default whereof to undergo simple imprisonment for 30 days with benefit of section 382(b) Cr.P.C.

4. In case of Salah-Ud-Din vs. The State (1990 P.Cr.L.J 1221), it has been held by Lahore High Court that;

“In the present case the appellant had not used their weapons. What they had done was the pointation of weapons at the complainant and under the fear thereof, he was made to surrender his Rickshaw and Rs.10/-, he was carrying. The offence committed, thus amounted to simple robbery punishable under Section 392 of the Code.”

5. Subject to above modification, the instant jail appeal fails and is disposed of accordingly.

JUDGE