JUDGMENT.

Ahmed Ali Sheikh, J.- By judgment dated 21.6.2006, the appellant was convicted by learned Special Judge(CSN), Ghotki, and sentenced to suffer R.I.for 8 years and to pay fine of Rs.20,000/- and in default thereof the appellant to undergo further SI for six months.

The facts of the prosecution in brief are that on 24.10.2004 complainant Hussain Bux Larik, excise Inspector Ghotki alongwith his subordinate staff left excise circle for detecting the excise crimes. They reached on national highway near Ruk Farm taluka Ghotki and started checking the vehicles. During checking a wagon No.R.0157 came which was stopped. In the wagon one person was found in suspicious condition and under his feet a small size cartoon of hard board was lying. Complainant party got alighted the said person from the wagon and carton was taken into possession. In presence of Mashirs EC Niaz Hussain and EC Khursheed, complainant enquired his name, on which he disclosed his name as Abdullah Dharjeo. The cartoon was opened, in which they found opium which became two Kgs. Out of which 200 grams were separately sealed for chemical analysis and rest opium was also sealed separately. Such Mashirnama was prepared in presence of Mashirs and thereafter FIR was lodged. After usual investigation the appellant was challaned.

The trial Court framed the charge against the appellant, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

At trial prosecution, in order to prove the charge and substantiate the allegations leveled against the appellant, produced two witnesses, in all. P.W.1 complainant Hussain Bux Larik, Excise Inspector and P.W.2 Mashir EC Niaz Hussain.

In his statement recorded under section 342 CrPC, appellant denied the allegation leveled against him and pleaded his innocence. Appellant neither examined himself on oath nor led any evidence in his defence.

Perusal of the evidence of prosecution witnesses reveals that while reiterating the version contained in the FIR, complainant and Mashir have deposed that they apprehended the appellant at the spot and recovered two KGs opium from his possession. Such memo of arrest and recovery was prepared at the spot in presence of Mashirs. We have thoroughly gone through the depositions of the P.Ws. and found that despite lengthy cross-examination, they stood firm and defence could not shake. The available record does not furnish any ground or motive for false implication of the appellant.

Learned counsel for the appellant after arguing at some length, requested that he will not press this appeal if the sentence of the appellant is reduced and lenient view is taken, as the appellant is first offender and does not carry previous criminal history and intends to start a new life.

The upshot of the above discussion is that the testimony furnished by the P.Ws. inspired confidence and was worth reliance. Therefore, we are of the confirmed view that the prosecution has proved its case, beyond any reasonable doubt against the appellants who has been rightly convicted and sentenced by the trial Court.

We have, however, considered the quantum of sentence awarded to the appellant and feel that the sentence of 7 years R.I. would meet the ends of justice in the peculiar circumstances of this case.

Resultantly, while maintaining the conviction of appellant, we reduce his sentence from 8 years R.I. to 4 years R.I. In this respect we are fortified by 2007 SCMR 206 and 2009 P.Cr.L.J. 355.

With this modification we had dismissed the appeal on 07.10.2009 by a short order and these are the detailed reasons for the same.

JUDGE,