THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA

Criminal Appeal No.D-05 of 2022

Before:

Mr. Justice Shamsuddin Abbasi

Mr. Justice Amjad Ali Sahito

Appellant: Dur Muhammad S/O Ali Muhammad Brohi through Mr. Asif Ali Abdul Razzak Soomro, Advocate.

Respondent: The State, through Mr. Ali Anwar Kandhro, Additional Prosecutor General, Sindh.

Date of hearing: 26.10.2022.

Date of Judgment: 26.10.2022.

J U D G M E N T

AMJAD ALI SAHITO, J-. Through this Criminal Appeal, the appellant has challenged Judgment dated 22.12.2021, passed by learned Model Criminal Trial Court-I/Special Judge, CNS Hyderabad in Special Case No.167 of 2021, Crime No. 36/2021 registered at P.S Chalgri, Hyderabad for the offence under section 9(c) CNSA, 1997, whereby the appellant was convicted and sentenced for the offence under section 9(c) CNASA, 1997 for possessing 2500 grams of chars to undergo R.I for five years and six months with fine to the tune of Rs.25000/-; in case of default to undergo S.I for five months and fifteen days. However, the benefit of Section 382-B Cr.P.C. was extended to the appellant.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant at the very outset has stated that the appellant is only bread earner of his family and has remained in jail for sufficient period and still is being dragged in the instant case; as such, he does not wish to contest this Criminal Appeal and leave the appellant at the mercy of the Court. He states that if this Court while maintaining the conviction reduced the sentence to one he has already undergone, he would not press the Criminal Appeal.

3. On the other hand, learned Additional Prosecutor General, Sindh concedes that the appellant has remained behind the bars for sufficient period and has learnt the lesson, therefore, he has no objection if a lenient view is taken against him by dismissing the instant Criminal Appeal and treating the sentence to one as already undergone.

4. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant, learned Additional Prosecutor General and have gone through the material available on record. The witnesses have supported each other on all salient features of the case and there appears to be no worthwhile contradictions. The offence pertains to the year 2021. The appellant is behind the bars. The Jail Roll of the appellant was called from the concerned jail, which reflects that the appellant has served out three years, ten months and five days including remission. The appellant is sole bread earner of his family and has remained in jail and learnt the lesson as he has undergone sufficient period of his sentence. The punishment provided for the same is upto 5 years; therefore, there is no legal impediment in accepting the request of the learned counsel for the appellant.

5. Only in order to enable the appellant to reform and rehabilitate himself to rejoin the mainstream life to once again become a useful member thereof, by taking leniency, instant Criminal Appeal is dismissed, but with the reduction of his sentence to one as already undergone by the appellant including fine amount. In view of above position, the office is directed to issue release writ for the appellant if he is not required in any other custody case.

6. Instant Criminal Appeal is dismissed with the above modification.

J U D G E

Manzoor