Muhammad Zabit vs The State
This criminal appeal challenges the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court following the appellant's plea of guilt in a narcotics case involving the recovery of 360 grams of chars. The core legal question concerns the propriety of the sentence awarded after a guilty plea and whether the trial court adhered to the necessary procedural safeguards before accepting such a plea. The Court held that while Section 412 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 restricts appeals against convictions based on guilty pleas, the appellate court retains the authority to review the legality and extent of the sentence. The judgment establishes that when an accused pleads guilty, the court must ensure the plea is voluntary and that the accused fully understands the implications of the charge. Furthermore, it emphasizes that if a court intends to impose a severe sentence despite a guilty plea, it must forewarn the accused. Finding the original four-year sentence harsh, the Court modified it to the period already served and set aside the fine.
- Does Section 412 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 bar an appeal against the extent of a sentence imposed after a plea of guilt?
- What procedure must a trial court follow before accepting a plea of guilt to ensure it is voluntary and informed?
- Is a trial court required to forewarn an accused of the potential severity of a sentence if it intends to impose a maximum punishment despite a guilty plea?
- Section 9-C, Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 412, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
MUSSARAT HILALI, J.- This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment dated 03.03.3021 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI / Child Protection Court, Kohat, passed in case FIR No. 144 dated 03.02.2020 under Section 9-C CNSA 3/4 P.O, registered at Police Station, Cantt. Kohat, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for four years with fine of Rs.60,000/- or in default whereof to suffer further imprisonment for three months S.I with benefit u/s 382-B Cr.P.C.
2. Allegations against the accused-appellant are that on 03.02.2020 at 16.00 hours near Chakarkot Graveyard, the local police of police station Cantt. Kohat recovered a blue plastic shopper containing 360 grams chars from side pocket of appellant. Accordingly , he was arrested and the ibid case FIR was registered.
3. The learned trial Court, on the basis of plead guilty by the appellant, convicted and sentenced him, as referred to above. Hence, the instant appeal.
Arguments heard and record perused.
4. Under Section 412 Cr.P.C, when an accused person has pleaded guilty and has been convicted, there shall be no appeal except as to the extent and legality of the sentence. In the instant case, as per the contents of the FIR, 360 grams chars was allegedly recovered from the possession of the accused-appellant. The accused- appellant was arrested, whereafter on 14.02.2020, he was allowed bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kohat. On 03.03.2020, the accused-appellant submitted an application before the learned trial Court wherein by waiving the right of trial and right of appeal, he pleaded guilty and left himself at the mercy of the learned Court. On the same day, charge was framed and on his own plea, the accused was convicted and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for four years with fine of Rs.60,000/- and in-default of payment of fine he was to suffer three months imprisonment. The accused-appellant has challenged his sentence on the ground that he submitted the application expecting the Court to award him the lesser possible sentence, however, to his utter surprise and shock, the sentence awarded was harsh and vulnerable.
5. The procedure in cases where the accu sed "plead guilty" is different from the procedure adopted in the cases where the accused "plead not guilty". In cases where the accused pleads guilty, no further proceedings in respect of the offence is conducted and after looking into the nature of the offence by taking a lenient view the minimum sentence (if prescribed by the Statute) is awarded.
6. In cases where the Court intends to award maximum punishment, the accused shall be forewarned about the implication of the charge and the effect of plead guilty. The Court shall disclose its mind to the accused that even if he pleads guilty, the Court is not going to take lenient view and if the accused still stands by his position then the Court shall decide the case according to the nature of the charge. In the instant case, the accused was not found guilty rather he pleaded guilty only to come out from the rigors of the prolong trial.
Looking into the merits of the instant case, it appears that if the accused had not pleaded guilty and claimed trial, he would have been acquitted. On perusal of the entire record of the instant case, it is found that there is nothing on the record showing that the learned Court before awarding the impugned sentence, satisfied itself that the plea of guilt was made by the accused after the charge had fully been explained to him and that the accused understood the charge and its implication and that the same was voluntary .
As has been mentioned in the preceding para that there is a bar of appeal under Section 412 Cr.P.C on the matters decided on plead guilty, therefore, without touching the conviction, it is held that the sentence awarded to the accused-appellant is harsh, thus the same is modified in terms that the sentence of four years is reduced to the period which he has already spent in custody. The fine imposed upon him is also set aside.