ZAFAR ABBAS vs THE STATE
This criminal appeal was filed by the appellant challenging his conviction and sentence under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Layyah. The appellant was found guilty of possessing 1015 grams of charas and 1020 grams of opium, resulting in a sentence of seven years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine. During the appeal, the learned counsel for the appellant did not contest the conviction on merits but pleaded for a lenient view regarding the quantum of sentence, highlighting that the appellant was a first-time offender with no prior criminal history. The Lahore High Court, while maintaining the conviction, accepted the plea for leniency. The Court reduced the sentence of rigorous imprisonment from seven years to five years while keeping the remaining parts of the trial court's judgment, including the fine, intact.
- Whether a clean criminal record and status as a first-time offender can be considered mitigating factors to reduce a sentence under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997?
- Can an appellate court maintain a conviction under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997 while reducing the quantum of imprisonment?
- Section 9(c), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
' SAIF UR REHMAN, J.---Zaffar Abbas appellant was tried under section 9(c) of C.N.S.A. 1997 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Layyah in case F.I.R. No,86 dated 19-6-2005 registered at Police Station, Sadar Layyah and on conclusion of trial was found guilty for keeping possession of 1015 grams charas and 1020 grams opium, convicted accordingly and sentenced to undergo R.I. For 7 years and to pay fine amounting to Rs,10,000 and in default thereof to undergo S.I. For 3 months vide judgment dated 27-6-2006.
2. The appellant has assailed his conviction and sentence through this appeal.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the appellant would feel satisfied if a learned view was taken in awarding sentence because the appellant was a first offender. Reliance in this regard was placed on 2007 SCM R 206.
4. In view of the above contentions we do not feel necessary to reproduce the detailed facts. The appellant is first offender and has no previous criminal history. Therefore, while maintaining the conviction we reduce sentence of R.I. From 7 years to R.I for 5 years maintaining the remaining judgment.
5. This appeal is disposed of A accordingly. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.