THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT, LARKANA
Criminal Appeal No.S-63 of 2010
Appellants: Abid Ali Noonari and 4 others through Mr. Safdar Ali Ghouri, Advocate.
Complainant: Nazir Ahmed through Mr. Saeed Ahmed B. Bijarani, Advocate.
Respondent: The State, through Mr. Aitbar Ali Bullo, Deputy Prosecutor General, Sindh.
Criminal Appeal No.S-71 of 2010
Appellant: Nek Muhammad Noonari, through Mr. Habibullah G. Ghouri, Advocate.
Complainant: Nazir Ahmed through Mr. Saeed Ahmed B. Bijarani, Advocate.
Respondent: The State, through Mr. Aitbar Ali Bullo, Deputy Prosecutor General, Sindh.
Date of hearing: 07.11.2022.
Date of Judgment: 07.11.2022.
J U D G M E N T
AMJAD ALI SAHITO, J-. Through this single Judgment, I intend to dispose of the above Criminal Appeals filed by the appellants against the Judgment dated 21.05.2010 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kandhkot in Sessions Case No.20/2008, emanating from Crime No.70 of 2008 for the offence under sections 324, 337-A(i)(ii), 337-F(i), 147, 148 & 149 P.P.C, registered at Police Station A-Section, Kandhkot, whereby the appellants were convicted and sentenced as under:
Accused Nek Muhammad and Niaz Ahmed were convicted under section 337-A(i)(ii) P.P.C and sentenced to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for three years and also to pay an amount of Rs.37721.50 as Arsh jointly to the victim Bashir Ahmed being 5% of Diyat amount; both accused were also imposed fine of Rs.5000/- as amount of daman jointly alongwith it to suffer Simple Imprisonment for one year as Tazir under section 337-A(i) P.P.C. Accused Muhammad Ali alias Hatim was convicted under section 337-A(i) P.P.C and sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment as Tazir for one year and to pay Rs.5000/- as daman amount to injured Hidayatullah. Accused Allah Dino was convicted under section 337-A(i) P.P.C and sentenced to suffer for one year and to pay Rs.5000/- as daman to injured Lal Muhammad. Accused Ghulam Muhammad was convicted under section 337-F(i) P.P.C and sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for a term of six months and to pay Rs.3000/- as daman amount to injured Asif Ali. Accused Abid was convicted under section 337-A(i) P.P.C and sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for one year as Tazir and to pay amount of Rs.7000/- as daman to injured Nazar Muhammad. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently and benefit of section 382-B Cr.P.C was also extended to the accused.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants has mainly contended that there is no allegation against the appellants Abid Ali and Nek Muhammad. The attendance of appellant No.4 Nek Muhammad in Criminal Appeal No.S-71 of 2010 was already dispensed with looking to his old age. After arguing the matter at some length learned counsel has stated that the offence pertains to the year 2008 and the appellants have remained in Jail for sufficient period and still are being dragged in the instant case; as such, he does not wish to contest these Criminal Appeals and leave the appellants at the mercy of the Court. He states that if this Court while maintaining the conviction reduces the sentence to one to the extent of appellants Muhammad Alim alias Hatim, Ayaz Ahmed, Niaz Ahmed, Khalil, Ali Sher, Ghulam Muhammad and Allah Dino as already undergone, he would not press these Criminal Appeals. However, he submits that there is no evidence against appellants Nek Muhammad son of Ghulam Mustafa and Abid Ali son of Piyaro.
3. Mr. Saeed Ahmed B. Bijarani, learned counsel for the complainant raised no objection to the extent of sentence to one as already undergone. However, he submits that except appellants Nek Muhammad and Abid Ali, the rest of the appellants may be directed to pay compensation/daman amount in lump sum to the tune of Rs.62721/- to be paid to the complainant and injured persons.
4. On the other hand, learned Deputy Prosecutor General, Sindh appearing for the State has opposed the acquittal of the appellants, however, admitted that there is no allegation against appellants Abid Ali and Nek Muhammad as they have not committed any offence, therefore, raises no objection if by taking lenient view appellants Abid Ali and Nek Muhammad are acquitted after payment of daman/compensation amount.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellants, learned counsel for the Complainant as well as Deputy Prosecutor General and have gone through the material available on record. It appears that these Criminal Appeals are pending before this Court since 2010 and the matter pertain to the year 2008. The appellants had been attending the learned trial Court as well as this Court and had remained in jail for some period of their sentences and the learnt the lesson. The punishment awarded to the accused is upto three years, there is no legal impediment in accepting the request of the appellants to the extent of appellants Muhammad Alim alias Hatim, Ayaz Ahmed, Niaz Ahmed, Khalil, Ali Sher, Ghulam Muhammad and Allah Dino.
6. While maintaining the Judgement dated 21.05.2010 against all the appellants except appellant Abid Ali and Nek Muhammad and the appellants Nek Muhammad and Abid Ali are acquitted of the charge, as per learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned counsel for the complainant and learned Deputy Prosecutor General there is no evidence against appellants Abid Ali and Nek Muhammad; as such they are acquitted of the charge. The impugned judgment is set aside to the extent of appellants Abid Ali and Nek Muhammad with order to the rest of the appellants to deposit the payment of daman/compensation to the tune of Rs.62721/- to be given to the complainant and injured persons. Appellants Muhammad Alim alias Hatim, Ayaz Ahmed, Niaz Ahmed, Khalil, Ali Sher, Ghulam Muhammad and Allah Dino are present in the Court and paid amount of Rs.62721/- to Mr. Saeed Ahmed B. Bijarani, learned counsel for the complainant. He undertakes/directed that the amount received from the accused named above shall be distributed to the injured persons/complainant as per Judgment. Appellant Abid is present on bail whereas presence of appellant Nek Muhammad was dispensed with looking to his old age, their bail bonds stand cancelled and surety discharged. Office is directed to return the surety papers to the surety after proper verification and identification as per rules.
7. Instant Criminal Appeals are disposed of with the above modification.
J U D G E
Manzoor