IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA.

Crl. Appeal No. D–10 of 2022

Before:

                                                Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah.

                                                                                    Mr. Justice Zulfiqar Ali Sangi.

Appellant:                            Muhammad Yaqoob Muhammadani

Through Mr.Ahsan Ahmed Qureshi, Advocate.

The State:                              Through Mr. Ali Anwar Kandhro, Addl.P.G.

Date of hearing:                  05-04-2023.

Date of decision:                 05-04-2023.

JUDGMENT

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J. It is alleged that on arrest from the appellant was secured 2600 grams of Charas by police party of P.S A-Section Kandhkot, for that he was booked and reported upon. On conclusion of trial, he was convicted u/s. 9 (C) of CNS Act, 1997 and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 05 years and 06 months with fine of Rs.25,000/- and in default whereof, to undergo Simple Imprisonment for 05 months and 15 days, with benefit of section 382-B Cr.PC by learned Sessions/CNS Judge, Kashmore @ Kandhkot, vide judgment dated  01.02.2023, which he has impugned before this Court by way of instant Crl.Appeal.

2.         It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant being innocent has been involved in this case falsely by the police and evidence of PWs being doubtful in its character has been believed by learned trial Court without assigning cogent reason, therefore, he is entitled to be acquitted by extending him benefit of doubt or alternatively sentence awarded to him to be reduced to one which he has already undergone as he being young man and teacher is sole bread earner of his family

3.         Learned Addl.P.G for the State was fair enough to say that he would be having no objection if the sentence awarded to the appellant is reduced to one which he has already undergone.

4.         Heard arguments and perused the record.

5.         It was stated by complainant SIP Ali Akbar and PW/Mashir PC Muhammad Tayab that on date of incident they with rest of the police personnel were conducting patrol, when reached at Zangipur Muhalla adjacent to Sabzi Mandi, they found the appellant standing there with shopper, he was apprehended and shopper which he was having was secured; it was found containing Charas; it was weighed to be 2600 grams; it was sealed and secured under memo; the appellant with the recovery so made then was taken to P.S A-Section Kandhkot, there he was booked in the present case formally and further investigation of the case was conducted by I.O/SIP Mughal Khan; it was stated by him that on investigation he deposited the Charas in Malkhana, recorded 161 Cr.PC statements of PWs, visited the place of incident, prepared such memo and then deposited the Charas with the Chemical Examiner  and he then was transferred therefore, further investigation of the case was conducted by SIP Khalil Ahmed. It was stated by SIP Khalil Ahmed that he obtained the report of chemical examiner; it was positive and after usual investigation, he submitted challan of the case before the Court having jurisdiction. All of them have stood by their version on all material points despite lengthy cross examination; they could not be disbelieved only for the reason that they are the police officials, ignoring the recovery of quantity of Charas from the appellant. They indeed were having no enmity with the appellant to have involved him in this case falsely. The appellant has neither examined himself on oath, nor anyone in his defence; therefore, his simple plea of innocence has rightly been ignored by learned trial Court by making a conclusion that the prosecution has been able to prove its case against him beyond reasonable shadow of doubt.   

6.         As per jail roll, the appellant has already undergone the substantial sentence of 00 years, 09 months and 17 days, besides this, has earned remission of 02 years, 00 months and 24 day, in that way he has already undergone approximately 03 years of the sentence, which appears to be sufficient in the circumstances; therefore, the sentence awarded to the appellant is reduced to one which he has already undergone which includes the sentence which he is likely to undergo on account of his failure to make payment of fine by considering the mitigating circumstances of the case as he is likely to lose his job; no criminal record is brought against him; he is of 28 years of age and said to be sole bread earner of his family.

7.         Subject to above modification, the instant Crl.Appeal fails and is dismissed accordingly.

                 JUDGE

JUDGE