MUHAMMAD RAMZAN Versus State
This criminal appeal challenges the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court under Section 9(b) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, regarding the recovery of 510 grams of Charas. The appellant, having been sentenced to two years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 25,000, did not contest the conviction but sought a reduction in the quantum of sentence. The High Court, upon review, observed that the sentence of imprisonment was excessive relative to the quantity of the narcotic substance recovered. Consequently, while the court dismissed the appeal regarding the conviction, it partly allowed the appeal concerning the sentence. The court reduced the term of imprisonment to the period already undergone by the appellant and reduced the fine to Rs. 10,000, with a default clause of three months of rigorous imprisonment. This judgment affirms the principle that appellate courts possess the discretion to modify sentences when the original punishment is disproportionate to the gravity of the offense and the quantity of the contraband recovered.
- Can an appellate court reduce a sentence of imprisonment if it finds the original sentence excessive relative to the quantity of narcotics recovered?
- Is a conviction under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997 subject to sentence modification on appeal if the conviction itself is not challenged?
- Section 9(b), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
M. BILAL KHAN, J .--Muhammad Ramzan appellant was convicted for an offence under section 9(b) of C.N.S.A. 1997 vide judgment, dated 22-4-2004 passed by the learned Additional Sessions 'Judge Special Court C.N.S.A., Khushab and was sentenced to two years' R.I along with a fine of Rs.25,000 in default whereof he was ordered to undergo S.I. for six months. Benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. was also awarded to Muhammad Ramzan accused. The appellant has challenged his conviction and sentence before this Court through the present appeal.
2. The allegation against the appellant is that on 7-1-2004 at 5-10 p.m. he had been apprehended by a raiding police party and Charas weighing 510 grams along with cash amounting to Rs.1000 was recovered from his possession. Regarding this incident F.I.R. No.7, dated 7-1-2004 under section 9(b) of C.N.S.A. 1997 was recorded at Police Station Khushab.
3. At the very outset the learned counsel for the appellant has stated that he does not challenge the conviction of the appellant recorded by the learned trial Court but he only prays for reduction of the sentence of the appellant.
4. As against that, the learned counsel for the State has maintained that as long as the conviction of the appellant was not disturbed by this Court he has nothing much to say on the quantum of sentence as the same lies within the discretion of the Court. While looking at the appellant's sentence of imprisonment we have found the same to be rather excessive keeping in view the quantity of recovered narcotic from him.
5. For what has been discussed above, this appeal is dismissed to the extent of the appellant's conviction recorded by the learned trial Court but the same is partly allowed to the extent of the appellant's sentence of imprisonment which is hereby reduced to the one already undergone by him. The sentence of fine is also reduced from Rs.25,000 to Rs.10,000 only in default in payment whereof he is directed to undergo three months' R.I. This appeal is disposed of in these terms.
H.B.T./M-582/L Order accordingly.