1. ' BASHIR A, MUJAHID, J.---Muhammad Khalid son of Muhammad Yasin after having been tried in case F.I.R. No, 184 dated 4-7-1999, under section 9(c), Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, registered at Police Station Darya Khan, was convicted vide the impugned judgment dated 26-12- 2002 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Bhakkar and sentenced to five years' RI and fine of Rs,20,000 in default of payment thereof he had to undergo three months' S.I. Benefit of section 382-B Cr.P.C, was, however, extended in his favour.
2. ' The brief facts of the case are that Muhammad Akram Khan, Inspector P.W.4 along with other police officials on 4-7-1999 at 11-50 a.m. Was present on patrol duty at Haidri Chowk, Darya Khan, where he received a spy information that one person is selling charas near the graveyard of Darya Khan city. On which he conducted the raid and on seeing the police party the accused (Muhammad Khalid, appellant) tried to escape but was apprehended who was holding a shopper of black colour wherefrom 1 Kg. Charas was recovered vide memo Exh.PB. On his personal search Rs,120 were also recovered. The complainant Exh.PB was prepared on the basis of which F.I.R. No,184 was registered.
3. ' After completion of investigation challan against the appellant was submitted. He denied the allegations and claimed trial.
4. ' During the trial prosecution examined as many as five witnesses to prove the guilt of the accused.
5. Muhammad Bakhsh, Naib Moharrir P.W.1 kept the sealed parcel containing Charas, cash amount and sample in police Malkhana in safe custody and handed over the parcel of sample to Ghulam Shabbir, FC P.W.2 for its deposit in the office of Chemical Examiner. Muhammad Riaz, A.S-I. P.W.3 was member of raiding party and attested the recovery memo. Exh.PA along with the I.O. Whereby Charas and cash amount were taken into possession.
6. ' Alter closing the prosecution evidence statement of the accused/appellant was recorded under section 342,Cr.P.C. He denied the allegations and claimed his innocence and false involvement.
7. ' The trial culminated into conviction and sentence of the appellant as mentioned above. Hence this appeal.
8. ' Learned counsel for the appellant at the very outset has submitted that he would not challenge the conviction recorded against the appellant but he has prayed for reduction in sentence as the appellant is a young man, first offender, and kind of narcotics recovered from his possession is Charas, which is comparatively less dangerous kind of narcotics.
9. ' Learned counsel for the State has opposed the appeal and supported the impugned judgment.
10. ' We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and examined the record, and find that the prosecution case has been established against the appellant beyond any shadow of doubt as the P. Ws. Have no previous enmity for his false implication. Their testimony has been corroborated by report of Chemical Examiner, therefore, learned counsel for the appellant is justified in not challenging the conviction.
11. ' As far as sentence is concerned, it is correct that the appellant is a young man of 23 years of age, he has no previous criminal history and the narcotics recovered from his possession is charas which comparatively is less dangerous, he has also faced the agony of the trial for a period of more than five years and has also served out more than half of the sentence, therefore, while maintaining the conviction, we reduce the sentence to the period having been already undergone by the appellant, which will meet the ends of justice. It is directed that the appellant be released forthwith from jail if not required to be detained in any other case. The appeal stands dismissed with the above modification in sentence. >