IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH
AT SUKKUR
Spl Crl. Jail Appeal No.D-187 of 2017
|
Date |
Order with signature of Judge |
For
hearing of main case.
Date
of hearing 15-08-2024
Date
of Judgment. 15-08-2024
Mr. Sohail Ahmed Khoso, Advocate for appellant.
Mr.
Aftab Ahmed Shar, Addl. P.G, Sindh for the State.
J U D G M E N T
MEHMOOD A.
KHAN, J; Through this Special Crl. Jail Appeal, the appellant
Saeed
Alam son of Arsalan Khan Malakdin Khail Pathan has impugned the
judgment dated 14-11-2017 passed by learned Sessions Judge/Special Judge (CNSA),
Ghotki in Special Case No.57 of 2016 (re.The
State Vs.Saeed Alam) for offence u/s 9-C of Control of Narcotics arising
out of Crime No.20 of 2016 registered at Excise DIO Camp, Ubauro for recovery
of 40 Kilograms of Charas. The appellant was tried and found guilty therefore,
he was sentenced through the impugned judgment to
undergo R.I for ‘Life’ and to pay fine of Rs.100,000/- (One lac) and in case of
default in payment of fine he shall undergone simple imprisonment for Fine
months more. Benefit of Section 382 Cr.P.C, was also extended to the
appellants.
2. Learned
counsel for appellant while taking us through the evidence wherein though we
have observed that the mashirs/official who have taken the illicit drugs for
chemical examination was not examined submits that though on merits the
appellant has a good prima facie case
for acquittal, but the learned trial Court while passing the impugned judgment
did not consider the evidence as well as the defence as put forth by the
appellant. However, without arguing the appeal on merits, learned counsel prayed
that he would not press the appeal against conviction if the sentence awarded
to the appellant is reduced to the period which he has already undergone.
3. Learned
Additional Prosecutor General quite professionally conceded to the request made
by learned counsel for the appellant for reduction of sentence to the one
already undergone by the appellant.
4. We have perused the record including the
Jail Roll of the appellant. Accordingly to the learned counsel for the
appellant, the total period, which the appellant has remained in jail, is about
07 years and 10 months excluding remissions.
5. In our opinion, the appellant has already
suffered adequate punishment. Accordingly, in the light of Judgment of the
Lahore High Court in the case of Ghulam
Murtaza (supra) and the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case
of Ameer Zeb (Supra), while
maintaining the conviction awarded by the trial Court in the instant case, the
sentence awarded to the appellant is altered to the imprisonment which he has
already undergone. However, the fine of Rs.100,000/- (One lac) is reduced to 11,000/-
(Rupees Eleven Thousand) which shall be deposited by the appellant
within a period of one month. In case of his failure to deposit the fine amount
within the stipulated period, the same shall be recovered from him by the trial
Court as arrears of land revenue or to undergo further simple imprisonment of
one month. Appellant namely, Saeed
Alam Pathan is confined in Jail, such intimation
be sent to concerned Jail for compliance
6. With
above modification in the sentence, this Appeal stands dismissed.
J U D G E
J U D G E
Ihsan/*