JUDGMENT SHEET

IN  THE  HIGH  COURT  OF  SINDH, CIRCUIT  COURT,  LARKANA

Criminal Jail Appeal.No.D-11 of 2022

(Muhammad Farooq Vs. The State)

______________________________________________________________

DATE            ORDER  WITH  SIGNATURE  OF  HON’BLE  JUDGE

_______________________________________________________________

Before:

                                               Mr. Justice Irshad Ali Shah.

                                                                                              Mr. Justice Arbab Ali Hakro.

For hearing of main case.

18.04.2023

                        Mr. Nisar Ahmed Abro, Advocate for the appellant.

Mr. Ali Anwar Kandhro, Addl.P.G for the State.

                        =  *  = * = * = * = * =

                        Facts in brief necessary for disposal of instant criminal jail appeal are that the appellant was found transporting through his Car 60 K.Gs of Charas and 02 K.Gs of Opium, for that he was booked and reported upon by police. At trial, he pleaded guilty to the charge with condition that the sentence likely to be awarded to him should be minimum; it impliedly was not accepted probably for the reason that it was conditional; the regular trial was conducted and its conclusion, the appellant was convicted under Section 9(c) of CNS Act, 1997 and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life with fine of Rs.500,000/- and in default whereof, to undergo simple imprisonment for ten years, with benefit of Section 382-B Cr.PC, by learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge/MCTC/Special Judge CNS Qamber, which he has impugned before this Court by preferring the instant criminal jail appeal

2.                     At the very outset, it is stated by learned counsel for the appellant that none of the witness so examined by the prosecution has been cross examined by learned counsel for the appellant, which has prejudiced him seriously in his defence. By contending so, he sought for remand of the case to learned trial Court with direction to conduct denovo trial, which is not opposed by learned Addl.P.G for the State.

3.                     Heard arguments and perused the record.

4.                     Apparently, the admission to guilt made by appellant was conditional and probably for this reason, it was not accepted by learned trial Court impliedly. It is an admitted fact that none of the witness so examined by the prosecution has been subjected to cross examination by learned counsel for the appellant, which has prejudiced him in his defence seriously; it could hardly be said to be a fair trial, which is guaranteed by Article 10-A of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. Consequently, the impugned judgment is set aside with direction to learned trial Court to conduct denovo trial against the appellant right from stage of charge.

5.                     The instant criminal jail appeal is disposed of accordingly.

                         JUDGE  

JUDGE