IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, CIRCUIT COURT LARKANA

Criminal Appeal No.S-57 of 2017

Appellant                      :     Saindad @ Saeedo s/o Muhammad Bachal Jatoi

Through Mr.Shahbaz Ali Brohi, Advocate

State                              :     Mr.Raja Imtiaz Ali Solangi, A.P.G

Date of hearing            :     27.08.2018             

Date of decision           :     27.08.2018                       

J U D G M E N T

IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J-. The appellant by way of instant appeal has impugned judgment dated 20.06.2017, passed by learned 5^th Additional Sessions Judge, Shikarpur, whereby he for an offence punishable u/s. 23(1) (a) of Sindh Arms Act, 2015, has been convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I for 04 years and to pay fine of Rs.15,000/- and in case of default in payment of fine to undergo S.I for 03 months, with benefit of Section 382-B Cr.PC.

2.                It is alleged that on arrest from the appellant was secured an unlicensed T.T Pistol of 30 bore with magazine containing five live bullets of the same bore, by police party of P.S Lakhi Ghulam Shah, which was led by Inspector Syed Hajjan Shah, for that the appellant was booked and challaned accordingly.

3.                At trial, the appellant did not plead guilty and prosecution to prove the charge against him, examined PW-01 complainant SIO/Inspector Syed Hajjan Shah, produced through him “roznamcha” entry relating to his departure from the said police station, memo of arrest and recovery, FIR of the present case and report of Forensic Expert, PW-02 Mashir PC Noor Muhammad and then closed the side.

4.                The appellant during course of his examination under section 342 Cr.PC denied the prosecution’s allegation by pleading innocence. He did not examine anyone in his defence or himself on oath in disproof of the prosecution’s allegation.

5.                On evaluation of evidence so produced by prosecution, learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellant by way of impugned judgment, as stated above.

6.                At the very outset, it is stated by learned counsel for the appellant that he would not press the disposal of instant appeal on merit, if the conviction and sentence which is awarded to the appellant by learned trial Court is reduced to one which the appellant has already undergone.

7.                Learned A.P.G for the State did not oppose the above said proposal of learned counsel for the appellant.

8.                I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.                 

9.                The appellant as per Jail Roll has already undergone substantial sentence of 01 year 05 months and 26 days. Besides this, he has earned remission of 08 months and 09 days. In that way he has already undergone the conviction and sentence which is spreading over period of 02 years, 02 months and 05 days approximately, which appears to be sufficient punishment for the offence, which he has allegedly committed.

10.              In view of above, the conviction and sentence awarded to the appellant by learned trial Court is reduced to one, which the appellant has already undergone, which shall include the simple imprisonment on account of failure of the appellant to make payment of fine.

11.              With above modification, the instant appeal is dismissed.

                                                                                                J U D G E

-