Ghulam Abbas vs State
This criminal appeal arises from the conviction and sentencing of the appellant, Ghulam Abbas, by the trial court for the possession of 1250 grams of charras under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. The appellant was originally sentenced to four years and six months of rigorous imprisonment with a fine. During the appellate proceedings, the appellant's counsel did not challenge the conviction itself but requested a reduction in the sentence, citing the appellant's remorse and repentance. Upon reappraisal of the evidence, the Lahore High Court upheld the conviction under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, finding it to be well-founded. However, in light of the specific circumstances of the case and the agony of the trial, the Court exercised its discretion to reduce the sentence from four years and six months to one year and seven months of rigorous imprisonment. The fine was maintained, but the sentence in default of payment was reduced. The benefit of Section 382-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, was extended to the appellant.
- Can an appellate court reduce a sentence for a narcotics conviction if the appellant expresses remorse and repentance?
- Is the benefit of Section 382-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 applicable to sentences imposed under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997?
- Section 9(c), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
Sadaqat Ali Khan, J.--Appellant (Ghulam Abbas) has been tried by the learned trial Court in case FIR No. 613 dated 1.7.2019, under Section 9(c) of CNSA, 1997 (charras 1250 grams ) Police-Station Airport, District Rawalpindi, and was convicted and sentenced vide impugned judgment dated 16.06.2020 as under:- Ghulam Abbas appellant Sentenced to 4-years & 6-months R.I. alongwith fine of Rs. 20,000/- and in default whereof to further undergo 5- months S.I. Benefit of Section 382-B, Cr .P.C. was extended to him.
2. Heard. Record perused.
3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellant does not press the conviction of the appellant in offence of under Section 9(c) of CNSA, 1997 and has requested for reduction of his sentence on the ground that the appellant has expressed remorse and repentance with an assurance not to deal with narcotics in future. On our reappraisal of evidence, we are of the view that appellant has rightly been convicted by the learned trial Court in offence under Section 9(c) CNSA, 1997. Coming to the reduction of sentence of appellant, considering the peculiar circumstances of this case discussed above and agony of trial faced by the appellant while maintaining the conviction of the appellant under Section 9 (c) of CNSA, 1997, his sentence is reduced from 4-years & 6 months R.I to I-Year & 7-months R.I. Fine of Rs. 20,000/- is maintained, however , sentence in default whereof is reduced to 15-days S.I. Benefit of Section 382-B, Cr.P.C. is extended to her. Reliance is placed on case titled "State through Deputy Director (Law) Regional Directorate, Anti-Narcotics Force Vs. Mujahid Naseem Lodhi " (PLJ 2017 SC 660).
4. With the above said modification in the impugned judgment, this criminal appeal is disposed of.