Bashir Bhayo vs The State
This criminal appeal challenges the conviction and sentence of the appellant, who was found in possession of an unlicensed Kalashnikov with ammunition and subsequently convicted by the trial court under the Sindh Arms Act, 2013, receiving a seven-year rigorous imprisonment sentence. The core legal question concerns whether the conviction and sentence should be maintained or modified in light of the appellant's request to not press the appeal on merits, provided the sentence is reduced to the period already served. The Court, upon reviewing the prosecution's evidence, found the recovery of the weapon proved beyond reasonable doubt, noting the lack of enmity between the witnesses and the appellant. However, considering the appellant's age, his genuine remorse demonstrated by not contesting the merits, his potential for reformation, and the fact that he had already served over five years in custody, the Court exercised leniency. The holding reduced the sentence to the period already undergone, including the default imprisonment for non-payment of fine, effectively disposing of the appeal.
- Can an appellate court reduce a sentence to the period already undergone if the appellant chooses not to press the appeal on merits?
- Does the recovery of an unlicensed weapon, when supported by credible witness testimony, constitute sufficient proof for conviction under the Sindh Arms Act 2013?
- Is a court justified in reducing a criminal sentence based on the appellant's potential for reformation and genuine remorse?
- Section 23(i)(a), Sindh Arms Act 2013
IRSHAD ALI SHAH, J.- It is alleged that the appellant was found to be in possession of an unlicensed Kalashnikov with magazine containing three live bullets, which he allegedly used for committing murder of Abdul Rasheed, for that he was booked and reported upon and after due trial was convicted and sentenced under section 23(i)(a)of Sindh Arms Act, 2013, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 07 years with fine of Rs.5000/- and in default whereof, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months, by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Kandhkot, vide judgment dated 27.08.2017, which is impugned by the appellant before this Court by preferring the instant criminal appeal.
2. At the very outset, it is stated by learned counsel for the appellant that, under instructions, he would not press disposal of instant criminal appeal on merits, provided, the conviction and sentence awarded to the appellant are reduced to one which he has already undergone.
3. Learned Addl.P .G for the State was fair enough to concede the above said proposition.
4. I have considered the above arguments and have perused the record.
5. It is case of the prosecution that appellant on arrest led to recovery of an unlicensed Kalashnikov with magazine containing three live bullets and such allegation, the prosecution was able to prove beyond shadow of doubt by examining Complainant ASI Khan Muhammad, PW/Mashir PC Khair Muhammad and Investigating officer/ASI Abdul Razzaque; they apparently were having no enmity with the appellant to have involved him in this case falsely by making foistation of such unlicensed weapon upon him, therefore, their evidence could not be discredited/doubted.
6. However , the appellant needs to be dealt with leniently for the reason that; it has come on record that he is young man of 35 years of the age, has entered into compromise with legal heirs of the deceased of main murder case and is appearing to be capable of reformation. By not pressing disposal of his appeal on merits, he has obviously shown his genuine remorse. The appellant obviously has remained in custody for more than five years, therefore, the imprisonment of seven years awarded to him is reduced to one, as already undergone by him, it includes the imprisonment, which he is likely to undergo on account of his failure in payment of fine.
7. The instant criminal appeal is disposed of accordingly .