ORDER PERVAIZ INAYAT MALIK, J. --- The petitioner was tried by learned Judicial Magistrate, Layyah in a case F.I.R. No. 173/2002, dated 6.5.2006 offence under Sections 324/34, P.P.C, registered at Police Station Chowk Azam, District Layyah , who vide impugned judgment. Dated 6.5.2006 convicted him and sentenced to seven years' R.I. With a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default whereof to further undergo three months R.I. He was also given benefit of Section 382-B, Cr.P.C.
2. The petitioner preferred an appeal against the conviction and sentence above-stated, which was dismissed vide the impugned judgment dated 12.6.2006 passed by teamed Sessions Judge, Layyah and who he was sent to Central Jail, Dera Ghazi Khan as a convict he moved an application under Section 426, Cr.P.C, praying for suspension of sentence which application was allowed and the sentence was suspended vide order dated 13.11.2006 passed by this Court in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1/2006. The grounds which found favour while suspending the sentence was firstly that the convict/petitioner had already served for a period, of 29 months and that as per medical report he was suffering from Hepatitis C, which could- not be cured in the jail in the order dated 17.7.2006, the opinion of Doctor also find mentioned according to which the petitioner was diagnosed as a case of iron deficiency anemia and Hepatitis C.
3. It is inter alia contended that there is no allegation of causing injury to the petitioner in the F.I.R.
The pistol alleged recovered from the petitioner, was not operational, as admitted by the prosecution witness PW-3; that the petitioner is a patient of Hepatitis C and after suspension of sentence since 13.11.2006, there is no complaint regarding misuse of bail that he is a previous non record holder and re-sending him in jail would not serve any useful purpose nor the same would be in the good interest-of justice; that although the prosecution case against the petitioner could be proved during the trial beyond any shadow of doubt yet he would confine his submission to the reduction of sentence on compassionate ground as well. Learned. Counsel for the petitioner also refers to the statement of PWs that the same were full of discrepancies.
4. Conversely learned Deputy Prosecutor General opposes the submission made at bar by the learned counsel for the petitioner, however, has not been able to controvert the submissions from the record, In response to query as to whether there was any injury caused by the petitioner, the learned Deputy Prosecutor-General was left with no option but to concede. His answer was that as per record the petitioner did not cause any injury to the injured PW. Adds that however the petitioner did shot a fire without repetition but the same missed the target.
5. Arguments heard. Record perused.
6. So far as submission of learned counsel for the petitioner regarding the discrepancies in evidence is concerned, I am not inclined to agree with him on this point for the simple reason that the statements of witnesses/PWs in trial are normally recorded after a little bit delay and such like discrepancies do not in normal course in particular after such a lapse of time. However, none of the discrepancies as pointed out are of -substantial nature, therefore, I am convinced that the prosecution was able to prove its case beyond any shadow of doubt. However, as far as quantum of punishment is concerned, his prayer for reduction therein does have the force: I find that the petitioner has already , served sentence of about 29 months. He was allowed bail by suspending his sentence as far back as on 13.11.2006 by this Court. Admittedly he is suffering from Hepatitis C which is a decease which goes with the patient throughout the life and heeds constant care and regular treatment. The petitioner is not a previous record holder. There is no complaint against him qua misuse of concession of bail, In view of above while maintaining the conviction I reduce the 'sentence to one which he has already undergone. He is on bail, his surety stand discharged.
7. With these observations this petition stands partly allowed.