Mehar son of Abdullah Shaikh vs The State
The appellant challenged his conviction and sentence under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, through two appeals arising from a judgment of the Special Judge CNS/Model Criminal Trial Court, Hyderabad, whereby he was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for two years with a fine for possession of 1020 grams of Chars. At the hearing, the appellant's counsel did not press the appeals on merits, seeking instead a reduction of the sentence on mitigating grounds that the appellant was a first-time offender with no prior criminal record and the sole breadwinner of his family. The Additional Prosecutor General readily accepted this proposal. The Sindh High Court considered the absence of independent witnesses, the lack of prior criminal record, the appellant's status as the sole earning member, and the protracted trial. Consequently, the court held that a lenient view was warranted, reducing the substantive sentence to six months' imprisonment while maintaining the fine, with the benefit of Section 382-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The appeals were disposed of accordingly.
- Whether an appellate court can reduce a sentence based on mitigating circumstances when the conviction itself is not contested on merits?
- Does the absence of an independent witness and prior criminal record justify a lenient view in narcotics cases?
- Is the benefit of Section 382-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 applicable when a sentence is reduced on appeal?
- Section 9(c), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J. It is alleged that on arrest from appellant was secured 1020 grams of Chars by police party of P.S Site Hyderabad led by ASI Ashique Ali Abro, for that he was booked and reported upon.
2. After due trial, the appellant was found guilty for an offence punishable under section 9 (c) of CNS Act, 1997 and was convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I for two years with fine of Rs.10,000/- and in case of his failure to make payment of fine to undergo S.I. for fifteen days by learned Special Judge Control Narcotic Substance/Model Criminal Trial Court-II/IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Hyderabad vide his judgment dated 26.08.2020, which is impugned by the appellant by preferring two appeals one from jail and other through his counsel.
3. At the very outset, it is stated by learne d counsel for the appellant that he would not press the disposal of instant appeals on merits, if the sentence/conviction awarded to the appellant is reduced to six months with fine for the reasons that there is no criminal record of the appellant and he is the only earning member of his family .
4. The proposal advanced by learned counsel for the appellant was readily accepted by learned A.P.G for the State.
5. We have considered the above arguments and perused the record.
6. There is no independent witness to the incident. There is nothing on record which may suggest that the appellant is having a criminal record. The appellant is said to be the only earning member of his family and he has suffered the agony of protracted trial for more than one year. In these circumstances, a case for lenient action against him obviously is made out, therefore, the conviction/sentence awarded to the appellant is reduced to period of six months with fine of Rs.10,000/- and in case of default to make payment of fine, the appellant would undergo simple imprisonment for period of ten days with benefit of section 382-B Cr .P.C.
7. Both the appeals are disposed of f in above terms.