2008 PLP 1408 (MLD)

MUHAMMAD AHSAN BHOON, J.

This judgment shall dispose of Criminal Revision No.159 of 2005 filed by Ahmad Sher, Lal Khan, Niamat Ullah, Muhammad Azam, Farooq Azam and Sikandar Azam and Writ Petition No.12475 of 2005 as both arise out of the same judgment, dated 16-2-2005 recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khushab, whereby he partly dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioners herein and Criminal Revision filed by the complainant for enhancement of sentence against the judgment, dated 23-12-2004 by which the learned Judicial Magistrate Section 30 Khushab recorded convictions and sentences, which are reproduced below:-. (i) All the petitioners were convicted under section 452, P.P.C. and sentenced to undergo three years' R.I and a fine of Rs.10,000 in default whereof to further undergo six months' S.I. All the accused were further convicted under section 148, P.P.C. and sentenced to undergo three years' R.I. (ii) Ahmad Sher petitioner was convicted under section 337-A(i), P.P.C. and sentenced to undergo one year's R.I and to pay Daman amounting to Rs.10,

000. He was further convicted under section 337-L(ii), P.P.C. and sentenced to undergo one year's R.I. (iii) Lal Khan accused was convicted under section 337-F(i), P.P.C. and sentenced to undergo one year's R.I. and to pay Daman amounting to Rs.10,000. (iv) Nehmat Ullah accused was convicted under section 337-F (ii), P.P.C. and sentenced to undergo two year's R.I and to pay Daman amounting to Rs.10,000, (v) Muhammad Azam accused was convicted under section 337-L (ii), P.P.C. and sentenced to undergo one years' R.I. (vi) Farooq Azam was convicted under section 337-L (ii), P.P.C. and sentenced to undergo two year's R.I each on three counts. (vii) Sikandar Azam was convicted under section 337-F(i), P.P.C. and sentenced to undergo one years' R.I and to pay Daman amounting to Rs.10,000 . All the sentences awarded to the accused were ordered to run concurrently and they were given benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C.

2. Precisely the allegation against the petitioners is that they all armed with deadly weapons formed an unlawful assembly, entered the house of the complainant and thereafter caused injuries to the injured P. Ws.

3. After due investigation report under section 173, Cr.P.C. was submitted in the learned trial Court. Charge was framed against the accused, who denied of the charge, pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution produced its evidence. The accused were examined under section 342, Cr.P.C. All the accused except Farooq Azam accused denied to lead defence evidence whereas all the accused declined to make statements on oath in disproof of the allegations levelled against them. Accused Farooq Azam produced certified copy of his MLC No.561 of 02, Ex. DB and copy of MLC No. 560 of 2002 of Mst. Shehnaz Bibi wife of Atta Muhammad as Exh. DC and closed his defence.

4. Learned counsel for the revision petitioners, at the very outset, does not contest this petition on merits but prays for reduction of sentence, as the petitioners/accused remained behind bars and that they are previously non-convict.

5. On the other hand, learned DPG, argued that the criminal revision is not being contested on merits and in case the conviction is maintained he has nothing to canvass as to matter of reduction lies with discretion of the Court. Learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the reduction of sentence.

6. I have considered the respective contentions of the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the record.

7. The petitioners namely Ahmad Sher, Muhammad Azam remained in Jail for about 2 years and four months, Lal Khan, five months, Farooq Azam six months and fifteen days, Sikander Azam four months and Nehmat Ullah six months 15 days. The petitioners are facing the agony of protracted trial since 8-11-2002. They have served out, major portion of substantive sentence. Sentences awarded to the petitioners are reduced to that of already undergone, which would be sufficient to meet the ends of justice. I, while maintaining conviction recorded by the lower Court reduced sentences of the appellants to already undergone. Sentences of fine and Daman shall remain intact. The petitioners shall pay the fine and Daman within a period of two months and in case of failure the learned trial Court shall send them behind the bars till the realization of amount of Daman and fine.

8. In view of the above this criminal revision is dismissed with the above modification and writ petition filed by the complainant for enhancement of sentence having no merit is dismissed. N.H.Q./A-45/L Sentenced reduced.