1. ' KHAWAJA NAVEED AHMED, J.-These three Appeals, Criminal Appeal No,405 of 2006, Criminal Appeal No,8 of 2007 and Criminal Appeal No,53 of 2007 are outcome of the same incident of robbery and recovery of robbed car from the appellants.
2. ' In Criminal Appeal No,53 of 2007 on 22-11-1999 the trial Court has framed the following charge against the appellanfs:- ' "That on 18th day of December, 1998, at about 1430 hours at Rafiqui Shaheed Road, Opposite Children Ward Jinnah Hospital at the Corner of Hockey Stadium Road, Karachi, all three of you along with absconding accused Mehfooz son of Mehmood with common intention on the point of TT pistol snatched Car Suzuki Margalla, bearing Registration No,AAS-393 from complainant Nasrullah son of Chaudhry Muhammad Ibrahim '(duly recovered from your possession) and you with knowledge that the same is robbed property kept the same in your possession and that you thereby committed an offence punishable under sections 392/ 34/412, P.P.C. And within the cognizable of this Court."
3. ' The learned Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi (South), in this case has convicted appellant Syed Raza Ahmed under section 392, P.P.C. And sentenced him to undergo R.I. For seven years and pay fine of Rs,5,000 vide judgment, dated 27-1-2007.
4. ' In the connected Criminal Appeals Nos.405 of 2006 and 8 of 2007, the learned Sessions Judge, Malir, Karachi. Mr. Imam Bux Soomro, in Sessions Case No,3 of 1999, on 26-3-1999 has framed the following charge:- ' "That on 23rd day of December, 1998 at about 2315 hours, at Neepa Chowrangi near Social Security Hospital, Quaidabad, Malir, Karachi, you were found in possession of a Car (Margalla) bearing Registration No,AAS-393, which was robbed property of F.I.R. No,292 of 1998 under section 392/34 of Police Station Frere and thereby you committed an offence punishable under section 412/34, P.P.C., within the cognizance of this Court. "
5. ' In this case, the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Malir, has convicted the appellants vide judgment, dated 29-11-2006, as under:- ' "In view of my finding on Point No,l my finding on this point is that the prosecution h& proved its case, beyond any shadow of doubt, against the accused persons. Accordingly, I convict the accused Muhammad Yaqoob son of Muhammad Yamin and sentence him to undergo Rigorous imprisonment for seven (7) years and to pay a fine of Rs, 10,000 (ten thousand) and in case of nonpayment of fige, he will undergo R.I. For (3) three months more. I also convict the accused Syed Raza Ahmed son of Syed Al-e-Ahmed and Abdul Nabi alias Rashid son of Khawaja Mobinuddin and sentence them to undergo rigorous imprisonment of 5 years' and to pay a fine of Rs, 10,000 (ten thousand) and in case of nonpayment of fine, they will undergo R.I. For 3 three months. The accused Syed Raza Ahmed and Abdul Nabi alias Rashid are present on bail, their bail stands cancelled and surety bonds discharged. Accused Muhammad Yaqoob son of Muhammad Yamin is present on custody. The accused were taken into custody and remanded back to Central Prison, Karachi, to serve out the above said sentence. The accused are awarded the benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C."
6. ' In both, the F.I.Rs, the car is the same, the set of accused persons is the same but the jurisdiction of the trial Courts is different. In Criminal Appeal No,53 of 2007 the jurisdiction lies with Karachi (South) while in Criminal Appeals No,405 of 2006 and 8 of 2007, the jurisdiction lies with District Malir, Karachi. The date of arrest of appellants in both the cases is 18-12-1998. The learned Advocate for the appellant states that appellant Abdul Nabi alias Rashid had remained in custody since 18-12- 1998 while appellant Syed Raza Ahmed was granted bail on 18-8-2000 and was again arrested on 29-11-2006.
7. ' Mr. Abdul Razzak, the learned counsel for appellant Syed Raza Ahmed has submitted that if this Court orders running of sentences concurrently and reduce the same to already undergone, he shall be satisfied. Mr. Haider Shaikh, learned counsel for the State, has no objection for running the sentences concurrently but at the quantum of sentence he has reservation because the appellant Syed Raza Ahmed had spent considerable time out of jail and as such he states that Syed Raza Ahmed should also serve seven years imprisonment as has been served by Abdul Nabi alias Rashid.
8. ' I have heard both the learned counsel and have perused the record with the assistance of the learned counsel. Both the cases are outcome of same incident though have been committed at different times. In the earlier F.I.R. Section 412 is also mentioned along with section 392, P.P.C. But since the jurisdiction from where the car was recovered falls within the jurisdiction of District Malir, therefore, a separate F.I.R. Was registered for the offence under section 412, P.P.C. And the case was tried separately by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, having jurisdiction at Malir District.
9. ' I am in agreement with the contention of both the learned counsel i.e, for the appellant as well as for the State that the sentence should run concurrently and as such I hereby order that in both the cases the sentences should run concurrently. As far as quantum of sentence is concerned I reduce the sentence of appellants to the one already undergone and amount of fine is reduced to Rs,1000 for each appellant.
10. ' With the above reduction in the amount of fine and sentence, the appeals are dismissed.