HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Criminal Appeal No. 70 of 2015

Present

Mr. Justice Naimatullah Phulpoto

Mr. Justice Mohammad Karim Khan Agha

JUDGMENT

Date of Hearing : 09.11.2016 .

Date of Judgment : 17.11.2016 .

Appellant : Jawwad Khalid Siddiqui through Mr. Aftab Ahmed Malik Advocate .

Respondent : The State through Mr. Ghulam Shabbir Baloch standing counsel .

NAIMATULLAH PHULPOTO, J.- Appellant Jawwad Khalid Siddiqui was tried by learned Judge, Special Court (Offences in Banks) Sindh at Karachi for offences under Sections 409/420/468/471 PPC. Appellant Jawwad Khalid Siddiqui was found guilty and vide judgment dated 11.02.2015, he was convicted and sentenced as under:

(a) Convict and sentence the accused Jawwad Khalid Siddiqui S/o Khalid Raheem Siddiqui U/s 409 PPC and sentence him to suffer 10 years R.I and fine of Rs.70 lacs. In case of nonpayment of fine he shall suffer further R.I for 02 years.

(b) Convict u/s 420/468/471 PPC and sentence him to suffer seven years R.I on each counts and fine of Rs.70 lacs each. In case of default in payment of fine he shall suffer further R.I for one year each.

(c) The accused is already in custody, therefore he is remanded to J.C to serve the sentence in the light of conviction above.

(d) He shall be entitled to the benefit of Section 382(b) Cr.P.C.

(e) All the sentences shall to run concurrently.

2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that accused was serving as Unit Manager CAD at Centralized CAD Hub Meezan Bank from 27.10.2008 to 28.02.2013. He was assigned duties to enter CA vouchers in the system of the Bank as well as Customer services. It is alleged that it was duty of accused to verify the accounts of the Banks, reconcile the books and advances of the Bank also. It is alleged that during above period of his duties, he made false and bogus entries in the system and misappropriated huge amount by transferring the same in the account of M/S Noor Engineering run by his father-in-law. During the internal inquiry, it revealed that accused had deposited an amount of Rs.12,86,000/-. FIR was registered against accused vide Crime No. 04 of 2013 at FIA/CBC/ Karachi under Sections 409/420/468/471 PPC. After usual investigation, challan was submitted against the accused before Special Court (Offences in Banks) Sindh at Karachi under sections 409/420/468/471 PPC.

3. Charge was framed against accused at Ex.2. Accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

4. In order to substantiate the charge, prosecution examined 08 P.Ws at trial. Thereafter, prosecution side was closed at Ex.12.

5. Statement of accused was recorded u/s 342 Cr.P.C at Ex.13, in which he admitted the allegations of misappropriation and fraud.

6. Trial court after hearing the learned counsel for the parties convicted the accused and sentenced as stated above.

7. Appellant preferred appeal and took U-Turn. However, learned Advocate for the Appellant did not press the appeal on merits but prayed for reduction of the sentence on the ground that Appellant is supporter of a large family and he is not previous convict of the offence of such nature. It is also argued that Appellant has not relied upon false defence and left himself at the mercy of the Court.

8. Mr. Ghulam Shabbir Baloch learned standing counsel argued that accused had admitted prosecution case before the Trial Court and appeal is not pressed on merits, he has recorded no objection in case lenient view in respect of sentence is taken.

9. We have heard learned counsel for the Appellant and learned standing counsel and perused the relevant record. It is the matter of record that accused in his statement recorded u/s 342 Cr.P.C has admitted the guilt and appeal has not been pressed on merits. It appears that accused has been convicted and sentenced by judgment dated 11.02.2015 as stated above. Jail Roll dated 11.11.2016 reflects that accused has been in custody since 06.04.2013 and he has undergone substantive sentence for 3 years and 7 months R.I and he has earned remissions of 2 years and 15 days. Unexpired portion of sentence has been shown 9 years, 4 months and 10 days. Offence u/s 409 PPC is punishable with imprisonment for life or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to 10 years and shall also be liable to fine. Counsel for the Appellant has contended that Appellant is supporter of a large family and he is not previous convict of offence of such nature and the learned standing counsel has also recorded no objection for taking lenient view in the sentence. Once, a person involved in a criminal case, would plead guilty/admitted incriminating evidence against him in statement under section 342 Cr.P.C and placed himself at the mercy of Court, in that eventuality the Court normally takes lenient view in respect of sentences. Extent of such leniency in awarding sentence should not be such so as to frustrate the ends of justice. Such leniency should be based on judicious scale, keeping in view the maximum and minimum sentence of offence and the submissions of learned Advocate for appellant, conviction under section 409 PPC is maintained. However, his sentence from 10 years is reduced to 7 years R.I, fine is also maintained. Conviction and sentences under Sections 420/468/471 PPC and fine are also maintained. However, appellant would be entitled to the benefit of section 382 Cr.P.C.

10. With the above slight modification in sentence of Section 409 PPC, the impugned judgment is maintained. Consequently, the appeal is without merit and same is dismissed.

J U D G E

J U D G E

..