2008 PLP 629 (MLD)

TASSADUQ HUSSAIN JILANI, J.

Appellant along with five others were tried by the Special Judge established under the Anti-Terrorism Act in the case registered vide F.I.R. No.373, dated 17-10-2000 under sections 395, 324, 337-A(ii), 337-F(ii), 337-L2, 212, P.P.C. read with section 7(I)(b) and section 7(ii) of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 at Police Station Mustafabad, District Kasur and the learned trial Court vide its judgment, dated 16-10-2001 while acquitting the co- accused convicted the appellant in following terms:-- "Imprisonment for life (rigorous) and fine to the tune of Rs.30,000 under section 395, P.P.C. and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 6 months' R.I. 5 years as Tazir in addition to payment ARSH amounting to Rs.13,458.80 five per cent of Rs.2,69,176 amount of Diyat notified for the year, 2000-200i under section 337-A(ii) of P.P.C. The amount of ARSH shall be paid in lump sum under section 337X(I), P.P.C. and shall be paid to Muhammad Hayat, S.-I. after its recovery in case of failure of on the part of convict to pay the amount of ARSH in lump sum, the convict (appellant) shall be kept in jail under section 337X(I), P.P.C. in the manner as if sentenced to simple imprisonment until ARSH is paid. Three years' R.I. under section 337-F(ii) of P.P.C., he shall also to pay Rs.10,000 as DAMAN under section 337-F(ii), P.P.C. which shall be paid to Muhammad Hayat S.-I. (victim) after its recovery. In case - of non-payment of amount of DAMAN, the convict (appellant) shall be kept in jail and dealt with in the same manner as if sentenced to simple imprisonment under section 337Y(ii), P.P.C. Two years' R.I. and shall also to pay amount of Rs.10,000 as DAMAN under section 337L(ii) of P.P.C. which after its recovery shall be paid to Muhammad Hayat S.-I. (victim). In case of non-payment of DAMAN on this count, the convict (appellant) shall be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of section 337Y(ii), P.P.C. Life imprisonment (rigorous) and also be liable to pay fine to the tune of Rs.50,000 under section 7(1)(b) of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 read with section 395 of P.P.C. and in default of payment of fine to further undergo six months' R.I. All the sentences shall run concurrently and benefit under section 382(B), Cr.P.C. has been extended."

2. The prosecution story as given in the F.I.R. briefly stated is that on the night between 16/17 of October, 2000 the complainant along with his family members was sleeping in the Veranda when at about 2-00 a.m. (night) four persons armed with .44 bore rifle, .32 bore revolver, .30 bore revolver and Chhuri entered his house and one of the co-accused kept guard on the roof top armed with a gun. The telephone wire were cut and on gun-point they forced the complainant to hand over the keys which were given to him with the help of which they opened the cupboard and from safe took away gold ornaments, a cash amount of Rs.12,000 and a licensed gun of .12 bore. In the meanwhile the complainant was able to make a telephone call to the nearest police station, the police party arrived headed by Muhammad Hayat S.-I. they encircled the house. However, all the co-accused except the appellant managed to escape. Appellant was apprehended after the little chase of one Farlang, during the scuffle which ensued the Investigating Officer (P. W.4) received injuries.

3. During the trial the prosecution examined six witnesses namely Muhammad Ibrhaim, P.W.1., who is the complainant, Muhammad Ishaque P.W.2, he is an eye-witness of recovery, Muhammad Siddique S.-I. P.W.3, he too is a recovery witness, Muhammad Hayat S.-I. P.W.4, he is an injured witness and Investigating Officer as well, Dr. Rasheed Ahmad Bhullar, P.W. 5 who is a Senior Medical Officer, RHC Mustafabad and conducted the medical examination of Ch. Muhammad Hayat and Zafarullah Khan, A.S.-I. P.W.6 who got prepared injury statements of Muhammad Hayat S.-I. and Muhammad Amin accused.

4. The accused when examined under section 342, Cr.P.C. denied the prosecution story and explained that he had gone to see his friend Muhammad Ilyas where police arrested him.

5. Having argued the case at some length learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is a previous non-convict, that he is a young man of 28/30 years, that he has already suffered the imprisonment for a period of more than 415 years, that he would not challenge the conviction provided his sentence is reduced. Learned counsel for the State in all fairness submits that, as the appellant has not challenged the conviction but prays for the reduction of sentence, he would not oppose the prayer for reducing the sentence. In view of the above, this appeal is dismissed, however, as the appellant is a first offender, is a young man and learned counsel for the State has no objection as also with a view to give him a chance to reform himself, his sentence of imprisonment for life under section 395, P.P.C. and section 7(I)(b), 7(ii) of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 is reduced to seven years' R.I., the fine and other sentences shall remain intact. H.B.T./M-664/L Order accordingly.