THE
HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI
Criminal Appeal No.324 of 2024
Present:
Mr. Justice Shamsuddin Abbasi
Appellant : Bilal son of Rahim through Mr. Rameez Raja Solangi,
advocate
Respondent : The State through Mr. Tahir Hussain Mangi, A.P.G.
Date of Hearing
: 16.05.2025
Date of Judgment : 16.05.2025
JUDGMENT
Shamsuddin
Abbasi, J.- Appellant Bilal son
of Rahim Bux was tried by learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Karachi East in
Sessions Case No.3366/2023, arising out of FIR No.451/2023, for offence under
sections 25 of the Sindh Arms Act, 2013, registered at P.S. Gulshan-e-Iqbal,
Karachi. After regular trial, vide judgment dated 18.03.2024, appellant was
convicted under section 24 of the Sindh Arms Act, 2013 and sentenced to undergo
R.I. for seven (7) years and to pay fine Rs.50,000/-, in default whereof to
undergo S.I. for 4 months. Benefit of section 382-B, Cr.PC was extended to
appellant.
2. Brief
facts leading to the filing of instant appeal are that on 09.08.2023 at about 1330
hours, upon recovery of one unlicensed 30 bore pistol, containing two live
bullets in its magazine, the appellant was arrested and aforesaid FIR was
registered against him on behalf of the State.
3. After
usual investigation, challan was submitted against the appellant under above
referred sections; trial Court framed Charge against him, to which he pleaded
not guilty and claimed trial.
4. At
trial, prosecution examined 4 witnesses, who produced relevant documents.
Thereafter, learned DDPP closed the prosecution side.
5. Trial
Court recorded statement of accused under Section 342 Cr.PC. Appellant claimed
false implication in this case and alleged that pistol has been foisted upon
him. He denied the prosecution allegations. Appellant neither examined himself on
oath under section 340(2) Cr.PC in disproof of prosecution allegations nor led any
evidence in his defence.
6. Trial
Court after hearing the learned counsel for appellant, prosecutor and while
examining the evidence, convicted and sentenced the appellant by vide judgment
dated 18.03.2024 as stated above. Hence, the appellant has filed instant appeal
against his convictions and sentence.
7. Learned
counsel for appellant argued that there is violation of section 103, Cr.PC;
that finding of the trial Court are based on surmises, conjectures and
misreading ad non-reading of evidence; that the appellant is not a dangerous,
desperate and hardened criminal; that due to his confinement in jail his family
members are passing a miserable life. However, after arguing the appeal on
merits he submits that the appellant has already served out his sentence,
therefore, he does not press this appeal on merits and requests for his
acquittal and submits that appellant will prove himself as a law abiding
citizen and will not indulge in any unlawful act in future.
8. On
the other hand, learned APG while supporting the impugned judgment has argued
that prosecution has successfully proved its case against the appellant beyond any
shadow of doubt, therefore, the appeal merits no consideration and is liable to
be dismissed. He recorded his no objection on the proposal that appellant has
served out his sentence.
9. I
have heard the learned counsel for appellant, learned APG for the State and
gone through the entire material available on record with their able
assistance.
10. Jail
roll of appellant was called, which reveals that appellant has served out
sentence, including sentence awarded to him in lieu of non-payment fine vide judgment
dated 18.03.2024. As per jail roll dated 16.05.2025, appellant has served out
sentence including remission 08 years and 02 days, whereas, he was sentenced to
R.I. for seven (7) years and to pay
fine Rs.50,000/-, in default whereof to undergo S.I. for 4 months. Learned
counsel for appellant does not press this appeal on merits and seeks acquittal
as the appellant has served out the sentence. Therefore, instant appeal has become
infructuous, the same is accordingly dismissed.
However, he may be released forthwith, if no required in any other custody
case.
J
U D G E
Gulsher/PS