JUDGMENT SHEET

HIGH COURT OF SINDH CIRCUIT COURT HYDERABAD.

CR. APPEAL NO.S-171 OF 2003..

Manzoor Hussain. . . . . . . . .Appellant.

                     Versus.

The State. . . . . . . . . .. RESPONDENT.

Appellant:                 Through M/S. Peer Bux Bhurgari and Nasira Shaikh, Advocates.

Respondent:                The State through Mr. Shahid Ahmed Shaikh, Assistant Prosecutor General, Sindh.

Date of hearing:           26.11.2009.

Date of judgment:           26.11.2009.

J U D G M E N T.

Ahmed Ali Shaeikh,J.- Vide judgment dated 16.8.2003, passed by the learned Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Hyderabad, the appellant was convicted and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years for offence under section 324 P.P.C. and fine of Rs.10,000/-. In case of default of payment of fine the appellant has to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months more. He was also directed to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- to be paid to injured Muhammad Ibrahim. The appellant has further been convicted and sentenced for offence 337-D P.P.C. to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default whereof he has to suffer R.I. for six months more. He was also directed to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- to be paid to injured Dr. Muhammad Ibrahim and in default to suffer R.I. for one year more. The appellant was also convicted and sentenced for offence under section 337-A(ii) P.P.C., to suffer R.I. for five years and fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default whereof to suffer R.I. for three months more. He was directed to pay compensation of Rs.25,000/- to injured Dr. Muhammad Ibrahim, in default whereof the appellant has to suffer R.I. for six months more.

2.    Per jail-roll the appellant has served 07 years, 07 months and 12 days with remission of 02 years and 02 months and 05 days. The unexpired portion of sentence is shown as 03 years, 11 months and 13 days.

3.    It is, inter alia, contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is a lone bread earner of his family. He has served out substantial portion of his sentence and he intends to start a new life.

4.    Learned A.P.G appearing for the State very frankly concedes the above submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant and raised his no objection.

5.    The appellant is the first offender and the lone bread earner of his family and since he has already served out the substantial portion of his sentence and from the jail record his conduct has been shown as satisfactory, I reduce the sentence as mentioned above and entire fine and compensation as mentioned in the impugned judgment to that period which he has already undergone.

6.    With the above modification I dismiss this appeal.

7.    Office is directed to issue release writ of the appellant. Jail Authorities are directed to release the appellant forthwith if not required in any other custody case.

                                                      J U D G E