Waqas Khan vs State and another
This criminal appeal challenges the conviction and sentence of the appellant, Waqas Khan, who was found guilty of possessing 2400 grams of charas under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. The trial court had sentenced the appellant to five years and six months of rigorous imprisonment along with a fine. During the appellate proceedings, the appellant's counsel did not contest the conviction but requested a reduction in the sentence, citing the appellant's remorse and repentance. The Special Public Prosecutor did not oppose this request. Upon reappraisal of the evidence, the Lahore High Court upheld the conviction under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. However, considering the peculiar circumstances of the case, the appellant's remorse, and the agony of the trial, the Court exercised its discretion to reduce the sentence of imprisonment to three years, while maintaining the fine and extending the benefit of Section 382-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898.
- Can an appellate court reduce a sentence for a narcotics conviction if the appellant expresses remorse and the prosecution does not object?
- Is a conviction under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997 sustainable when the appellant does not press the conviction on appeal?
- Section 9(c), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
Sadiq Mahmud Khurram, J.--Appellant (waqas Khan) has been tried by the learned trial Court in case FIR No. 60 dated 7.5.2018, under Section 9(c) of CNSA, 1997 (charas 2400 grams) Police Station ANF, District Rawalpindi, and was convicted and sentenced vide impugned judgment dated 1 7.03.2020 as under:-- Waqas Khan appellant Sentenced to 5-years and 6-months R.I. alongwith fine of Rs. 25,000/- and in default whereof to further undergo 5- months and 15"days 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 convi ction of the appellant in offence lender 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. Learned Special Public Prosecutor has no objection on the reduction of the sentence of the appellant. On our reappraisal of evidence, we are of the view that appella nt 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, statement of the learned Special Public Prosecutor 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 5-years and 6-months R.L to 3-years R.I. Fine of Rs. 25,000/- is maintained, however , sentence in default whereof is reduced to 1-month S.I. Benefit of Section 382-B, Cr.P.C. is extended to him.
Reliance is placed on case titled "State through Deputy Director (Law) Regional Directorate, Anti-Narcotics Force vs. Muhjahid Naseem Lodhi" (PLJ 2017 SC 660 ).
4. With the above said modification in the impugned judgment, this criminal appeal is disposed of.