ALI MUHAMMAD vs THE STATE
This criminal appeal challenges the judgment of the Special Court (Offences in Banks), Lahore, whereby the appellant was convicted under sections 420 and 471 of the Pakistan Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment along with a fine. The core legal question concerns the determination of appropriate sentencing and fine reduction considering mitigating circumstances, such as the appellant not being the ultimate beneficiary of the fraudulent withdrawals and his impoverished status. The Lahore High Court held that while the conviction is maintained, the substantive sentence of imprisonment already undergone by the appellant is sufficient to meet the ends of justice, and the heavy fine is substantially reduced. The key principle laid down is that courts may mitigate sentences based on mitigating factors like lack of personal financial benefit and the passage of a protracted trial period.
- Whether the sentence of imprisonment can be reduced to the period already undergone in cases where the accused did not derive any personal benefit from the crime?
- Can the appellate court reduce the quantum of fine imposed by the trial court under sections 420 and 471 of the Pakistan Penal Code?
- What is the effect of prolonged litigation and poverty of the accused on the determination of quantum of sentence?
- Section 471, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 420, Pakistan Penal Code
- Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
' KHAWAJA MUHAMMAD SHARIF, J.---This judgment will dispose of Criminal Appeal No,163 of 1990 filed by Ali Muhammad, appellant, who was convicted and sentenced by learned Judge Special Court (Offences in Banks), Lahore vide judgment, dated 26-2-1990 as under:--- Under section 471,One year's R.I. and a P.P.C.fine of Rs.2,00,000 and in default three months' R.I.
Under section 420,One year's R.I. and a P.P.C.fine of Rs.2,00,000 and in default three months' R.I.
' Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently with the benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C.
2. The prosecution case briefly stated was that the appellant on 13-8-1984 withdrew Rs,52,000 against Cheque No,629971 and another amount of Rs,42,000 against Cheque No,629973, dated 18- 8-1984. The amounts were withdrawn from the account of Municipal Corporation. On detection of difference, a complaint was lodged and Ali Muhammad appellant was arrested. No other accused was arrested or traced by the Police, so after completion of the investigation, the appellant was challaned to face the trial. Prosecution in order to prove its case produced 5 witnesses in all.
Thereafter, statement of appellant was recorded' and after conclusion of the trial, the appellant was convicted and sentenced as stated above.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant was not beneficiary he was employed by some unknown person who used to pay him Rs,900 per month as salary and that the appellant worked with him for 20 days for which he was paid Rs,500. Further submits that appellant is so poor that he even could not engage a counsel before the learned trial Court. Adds that no case whatsoever is made out against the appellant. Learned counsel lastly submits that if the appeal filed by the appellant is dismissed, then the period which the appellant has already remained in the jail may be treated to be sufficient.
4. Learned Standing Counsel for the State supports the judgment of learned trial Court.
5. In the instant case, appellant has withdrawn Rs,52,000 and Rs,42,000 respectively. The case was registered against him on 11-11-1984. Conviction and sentence was recorded by the learned trial Court, on 26-2-1990. The appellant has already undergone a period of four months and 21 days.
The appellant did not derive any benefit from the amount withdrawn by him. Applying the principle laid down by their lordships of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 1990 SCM R 320, the sentence of the appellant which he has remained in the jail, that is four months 20 days is treated to be sufficient to meet the needs of justice. Insofar as the amount of fine is concerned, that is also reduced from Rs,2,00,000 to Rs,5,000 on two counts, that is under section 471 and also under section 420, P.P.C. In default of payment of fine, the appellant shall undergo one month's S.I. On each account. The amount of fine shall be deposited within two months. The appeal filed by the appellant is dismissed with reduction in sentence and amount of fine.