IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR

Crl. Appeal No. S- 02 of 2020

DATE OF HEARING

ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE.

For hearing of main case.

Mr. Shabir Ali Bozdar Advocate for appellant.

Mr. Aftab Ahmed Shar Addl..P.G.

Date of hearing: 09-08-2021

Date of Judgment: 09-08-2021.

J U D G M E N T

Through aforesaid Crl. Appeal, appellant Rustam son of Noor Muhammad Waggan has challenged his conviction and sentence awarded to him vide judgment dated 30.12.2019, delivered by learned I-Additional Sessions Judge/MCTC, Naushehro Feroze in Sessions Case No.371 of 2014, arising out of crime No.55/2014 Police Station, Darya Khan Mari, whereby he was convicted for offence u/s 23(i)(a) of Sindh Arms Act, 2013 and sentenced to suffer R.I for five years and fine of Rs.10,000/-. In case of in payment of fine he shall further undergo SI for six months more; however, benefit of Section 382-B Cr.P.C was extended to him.

2. Facts in brief are that accused Rustam Waggan was required in Crime No.52/2014 under Section 302 PPC was arrested at Chandni chowk, link road leading from Phull to Misr-ji-Wah and secured one 30 bore pistol having smell of sulphur along with magazine from his possession. Thereafter, complainant brought accused and case property at Police where he lodged FIR.

3. Learned Counsel for the appellant contends that though the appellant has good case on merits but he will be satisfied and will not press instant appeal if sentence awarded to appellant is reduced to already undergone by him. In this regard he also files a statement whereby appellant does not want to press instant appeal on merits. He further submits that the appellant is sole bread winner of his family for that he and his family have faced hardship.

4. Learned Additional Prosecutor General conceded to the arguments of learned Counsel for appellant.

4. Perusal of Jail Roll of appellant of even dated reveals that the appellant has served out substantive portion of sentence for a period of 05-years and 13-days except remissions, which appears to be a major portion of sentence, hence appellant deserves leniency.

5. The upshot of the above discussion is that the learned counsel for the appellant has made out a case for reduction in the sentence of appellant, therefore, while following the dictum laid down in cases of Mohammad Mumtaz v. Mehtab and another (2020 SCMR 200), so also in order to give a chance to appellant in his life time to rehabilitate himself, the instant Crl. Appeal is partly allowed. Consequently, while maintaining the conviction of the appellant, the sentence of the appellant inflicted on him by learned trial Court is reduced to that of already undergone including fine amount. Appellant Rustam S/o Noor Muhammad Waggan is in jail, he shall be released forthwith if not required in any other custody case.

6. With above modification in sentence, the appeal stands dismissed.

J U D G E

Ihsan/PS