Ahmed Sher And Other vs The State
This criminal revision and writ petition arose from a judgment by the Additional Sessions Judge, Khushab, which partially dismissed appeals against convictions and sentences recorded by a Judicial Magistrate for offences involving unlawful assembly, house trespass, and causing injuries. The petitioners were convicted under various sections of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, including Sections 452, 148, 337-A(i), 337-F(i), 337-F(ii), and 337-L(ii). The core legal question concerned whether the sentences imposed were appropriate given the circumstances and the duration of the trial. The court, noting that the petitioners did not contest the conviction on merits, focused on the quantum of sentence. Considering the petitioners had faced the agony of a protracted trial since 2002 and had already served a significant portion of their substantive sentences, the court exercised its discretion to reduce the imprisonment terms to the period already undergone. The court maintained the convictions and the financial penalties (fine and Daman), ordering that failure to pay these amounts would result in further incarceration until realization. The principle established is that appellate courts may reduce sentences to the period already undergone when the accused has endured a protracted trial and served a substantial portion of their term.
- Can an appellate court reduce a sentence to the period already undergone if the accused has faced a protracted trial?
- Does a reduction in the term of imprisonment affect the liability to pay fine and Daman imposed by the trial court?
- Is a sentence of imprisonment for non-payment of Daman and fine permissible after the substantive sentence is reduced to the period already undergone?
- Section 452, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-A(i), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-L(ii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(i), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(ii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 173, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 342, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
JUDGMENT MUHAMMAD AHSAN BHOON, J.- This judgment shall dispose of Criminal Revision No. 159 of 2005 filed by Ahmad Sher, Lai Khan, Niamat Ullah, Muhammad Azam, Faruq Azam and Sikandar Azam and writ petition No. 12475 of 2005 as both arise out of the same judgment dated 16.02.2005 recorded by the learned Addl.
Sessions Judge, Khushab, whereby he partly dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioners herein and Criminal Revision filed by the complainant for enhancement of sentence against the judgment dated 23.12.2004 by which the learned Judicial Magistrate Section 30 Khushab recorded convictions and sentences, which are re-produced below:-
(i) All the petitioners were convicted under Section 452, PPC and sentenced to undergo three years'
R.I. And a fine of Rs. 10,000/- in default whereof to further undergo six months S.. All the accused were further convicted under Section 148, PPC and sentenced to undergo three years' R.I.
(ii) Ahmad Sher petitioner was convicted u/s. 337- A(i), PPC and sentenced to undergo one year's R.I. And to pay Daman amounting to Rs. 10,000/-. He was further convicted under Section 337-L(ii), PPC and sentenced to undergo one years' R.I.
(iii) Lai Khan accused was convicted under Section 337-F(i), PPC and sentenced to undergo one year's R.I. And to pay Daman amounting to Rs. 10,000/-.
(iv) Nehmat Ullah accused was convicted under Section 337-F(ii), PPC and sentenced to undergo two years' R.I. And to pay Daman amounting to Rs. 10,000/-.
(v) Muhammad Azam accused was convicted under Section 337-L(ii), PPC and sentenced to undergo one years' R.I.
(vi) Muhammad Azam accused was convicted under Section 337-L(ii), PPC and sentenced to undergo two years' R.I. Each on three counts.
(vii) Sikandar Azam was convicted under Section ' 337-L(ii), PPC and sentenced to undergo one year's R.I. And to pay Daman amounting to Rs. 10,000/-. All the sentences awarded to the accused were ordered to run concurrently and ' they were given benefit of Section 382-B, Cr.P.C.
2. Precisely the allegation against the petitioners is that they all armed with deadly weapons formed an unlawful assembly, entered the house of the complainant and thereafter caused injuries to the injured PWs.
3. After due investigation report under Section 173, Cr.P.C. Was submitted in the learned Trial Court.
Charge was framed against the accused, who denied of the charge, pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution produced its evidence. The accused were examined under Section 342, Cr.P.C. All the accused except Faruq Azam accused denied to lead defence evidence whereas all the accused declined to make statements on oath in disproof of the allegations leveled against them. Accused Faruq Azam produced certified copy of his MLC No. 561/02, Ex.DB and copy of MLC No. 560 of 2002 of Mst. Shehnaz Bibi wife of Atta Muhammad as Exh.DC and closed his defence.
4. Learned counsel for the revision petitioners, as the very outset, does not contest his petition on merits but prays for reduction of sentence, as the petitioners/accused remained behinds bars and that they are previously nonconvict.
5. On the other hand, learned DPG, argued that the criminal revision is not being contested on merits and in case the conviction is maintained he has nothing to canvass as to matter of reduction lies with discretion of the Court. Learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the reduction of sentence.
6. I have considered the respective contentions of ^ the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record.
7. The petitioners namely Ahmad Sher, Muhammad Azam remained in Jail for about 2 years and four months, Lai Khan, five months; Faruq Azam six months and fifteen days, Sikander Azam four months and Nehmat Ullah six months 15 days. The petitioners are facing the agony of protracted trial since 08.11.2002. They have served out major portion of substantive sentence. Sentences awarded to the petitioners are reduced to that of already undergone, which would be sufficient to meet the ends of justice. I, while maintaining conviction recorded by the lower Court reduce sentence of the petitioners to already undergone. Sentences of fine Daman shall remain intact. The petitioners shall pay the fine and Daman within a period of two months and in case of failure the learned Trial Court shall send them behind the bars till the realization of amount of Daman and fine.
8. In view of the above this criminal revision is dismissed with the above modification and writ petition filed by the complainant for enhancement of sentence having no merit is dismissed.