BARKAT HUSSAIN vs THE STATE
This criminal appeal challenges the conviction and sentence of the appellant, Barkat Hussain, who was found guilty under section 13 of the Arms Ordinance XX of 1965 by the Special Court No. 1, Rawalpindi. The appellant was originally sentenced to five years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 10,000 for the recovery of an unlicensed Kalashnikov during the investigation of a separate criminal case. Upon appeal, the appellant's counsel did not contest the conviction on its merits but requested a reduction of the sentence to the period already undergone in incarceration. The State counsel offered no objection to this proposal. Consequently, the High Court disposed of the appeal by maintaining the conviction but modifying the sentence to the period of imprisonment already served by the appellant. The court upheld the fine, stipulating that it must be paid within one month, with a default clause of six months of simple imprisonment. The appellant, being on bail, was ordered to be discharged from his bail bonds upon compliance with the fine requirements.
- Can an appellate court reduce a sentence to the period already undergone if the appellant does not contest the conviction on merits?
- Is a fine imposed under the Arms Ordinance XX of 1965 enforceable even if the substantive sentence of imprisonment is reduced to the period already served?
- What is the consequence of failing to pay a fine imposed by a Special Court under the Suppression of Terrorist Activities Act, 1975?
- Section 13, Arms Ordinance XX of 1965
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 307, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 342, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Suppression of Terrorist Activities Act, 1975
' KHAWAJA MUHAMMAD SHARIF, J.---This judgment will dispose of Criminal Appeal No,204 of 1991 filed by Barkat Hussain, appellant, who was convicted under section 13 of Arms Ordinance XX of 1965 and sentenced to five (5) years' R.I. With a fine of Rs,10,000 and in default of payment of fine to undergo R.I. For six months, by the Judge, Special Court No,1, Rawalpindi constituted under Suppression of Terrorist Activities Act, 1975 vide his judgment, dated 11-3-1991.
2. Briefly stated facts of the case were that during the investigation of case F.I.R. No,280 of 1990 under section 302/307/ 148/149, P.P.C. Registered with Police Station Gujjar Khan, District Rawalpindi, the appellant led to the recovery of Kalashnikov without permit/licence, as such a criminal case under section 13 of Arms Ordinance XX of 1965 was registered vide F.I.R. No,290 on 5-12-1990 with same police station.
3. After completion of the investigation, the appellant was challenged to face the trial. Prosecution at the trial produced three witnesses in all and thereafter statement of the appellant was recorded under section 342, Cr.P.C. After conclusion of the trial, the appellant was convicted and sentenced as stated above.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant does not press the appeal on merits and submits that he would be satisfied if the period of sentence which the appellant has already undergone is treated to be sufficient sentence in the facts and circumstances of the case. To this, learned counsel for the State has no objection. This appeal is accordingly disposed of in terms that the period which the appellant has already undergone in jail is treated to be sufficient sentence to meet the ends of justice. The sentence of fine is, however, maintained and shall be paid within one month from today and in default the appellant shall be taken into custody' to serve out the S.I. For six months.
Appellant is on bail in this case and shall stand discharged from his bail bonds.