INAYAT & 3 others vs StATE
This criminal revision petition challenged the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Mandi Bahauddin, which had enhanced the amount of Daman from Rs. 5,000 to Rs. 15,000 while maintaining the conviction under Section 337-F(iv) and F(vi) of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 and a sentence of 1-1/2 years rigorous imprisonment. The petitioners had been granted the benefit of Section 382-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Upon review of the record and considering that the petitioners had already served a substantial portion of their awarded sentence, the High Court addressed the core question of whether the sentence of imprisonment could be mitigated in the interest of justice. The Court held that reducing the sentence to the period already undergone would meet the ends of justice. Consequently, the Court maintained the conviction and the sentence of fine but modified the substantive sentence of imprisonment to the period already undergone by the petitioners.
- Can the High Court reduce a sentence of imprisonment to the period already undergone in a criminal revision petition?
- Is it permissible to maintain a conviction while reducing the substantive sentence of imprisonment based on the time already served?
- Section 337-F(iv), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(vi), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
This Criminal revision is directed against the judgment dated 31.3.2006 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mandi Bahauddin, whereby he accepted the revision petition of respondent/complainant and enhanced the amount of Daman of Rs. 5,000/- to Rs. 15,000/- and maintained conviction under Section 337-F (iv) and F(vi) PPC and sentenced the petitioner for 1-1/2 years R.I. Benefit of Section 392-B Cr.P.C. was also granted to them.
2. The learned counsel for the State has not seriously opposed the prayer made by the learned counsel for the appellants.
3. Heard. Record perused.
4. The appellants have already served out a major portion of their sentence, therefore, reduction in the sentence to the period already undergone by them will meet the ends of justice. Accordingly, I dismiss A the appeal to the extent of petitioner's conviction recorded by 'the trial Court but allow the same prayer to the extent of their sentence of imprisonment which is hereby reduced to the one already undergone by him. Sentence of fine is however maintained.
With the above modification in the sentence, this appeal stands disposed of.