2025 YLR 2678

Khurram Shahzad Versus State

Citation2025 YLR 2678

CourtLahore High Court

Judge(s)Muhammad Tariq Nadeem and Muhammad Jawad Zafar

Muhammad Tariq Nadeem, J .--- Khurram Shahzad, appellant was tried by the learned trial Court in case FIR No. 1028 dated 16-10-2022 offence under section 9(1)3(a) of The Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 for the charge of possessing charas weighing 270 grams registered at Police Station Dhulley Gujranwala and at the conclusion of trial, he has been convicted and sentence vide judgment dated 20-01-2025 as under:-

"Under section 9 (1)3(a) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. 1 year and 03 months R.I. with fine of Rs.40000/- and in default of payment thereof the appellant was to further undergo S.I. for 03 months. The benefit of section 382-B Cr.P.C. was also extended to the convict.

2. At the very outset, learned counsel for the appellant submits that he does not dispute the conviction of appellant under Section 9 (1)3(a) of the Act ibid, however, he requested for reduction of the sentence as the appellant is first offender and he has expressed remorse and repentance with an assurance not to deal with narcotics in future.

3. Conversely, the learned Law Officer submits that the learned trial court has rightly convicted the appellant and he does not deserve any further leniency.

4. Heard Record perused.

5. It has been observed by us that the prosecution has proved the guilt of the appellant beyond any reasonable doubt and has successfully discharged its burden through consistent and confidence inspiring evidence. In this way, the impugned judgment, resulting into conviction of the appellant for offence under Section 9 (1)3(a) of the Act ibid of The Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997, is not open to any exception. Consequently, the conviction of the appellant recorded through the impugned judgment is maintained. As far as quantum of sentence of the appellant is concerned, according to section 9 (1)3(a) of the Act ibid, the punishment provided up to 499 grams of charas, imprisonment which may extend to five years but shall not be less than ten months along with fine which may be up to forty thousand rupees. We have noted that the appellant is the first offender. According to jail report, he has already undergone the major portion of his sentence. Further, the appellant has expressed remorse and repentance with an assurance not to deal with narcotics in future. He should be given an opportunity to mend his ways, hence, the sentence of the appellant is reduced to 10 months R.I, which would meet the ends of justice. The sentence of fine is also reduced from Rs.40000/ to Rs.20000/-. However, the sentence in default thereof shall remain intact. Reliance is placed upon the cases titled as "Khuda Bakhsh v. The State" (2015 SCMR 735) and "The State through Deputy Director (Law) Regional Directorate, Anti-Narcotics Force v. Mujahid Naseem Lodhi" (PLD 2017 SC 671) and "Mst. Sughran and another v. The State" (2021 SCMR 109).

6. With the above mentioned modification in sentence of the appellant, the appeal in hand is dismissed. The disposal of the case property shall be as ordered by the learned Trial Court.

K-16/L Appeal disissed.