' Mushtaq Ahmed on conclusion of trial of case FIR No. 243/2007 dated 29.09.2007 registered under section 376, PPC with Police Station Ghazi-abad, Tehsil Chichawatni, District Sahiwal vide judgment dated 14.10.2009 handed down by learned Additional Sessions Judged, Chicha-watni, was convicted under Section 376, PPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for fourteen years with fine of Rs.1,00,000/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo six months S.I. Benefit of Section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Was also extended to the convict.
2. On the complaint (Ex.PD) of Mst. Shahnaz Bibi, the above FIR was registered to the effect that on the 26.09.2007 at about 10:30 a.m. Accused Mushtaq Ahmed committed rape with Mst. Maria Bibi, daughter of the complainant.
3. After registration of case and completion of usual formalities of investigation, the accused was sent up to face trial, where he was charge sheeted on 13.12.2008 and on his denial the prosecution examined as many as seven witnesses. On closure of prosecution evidence, the accused/appellant was examined under Section 342, Cr.P.C. Wherein he refuted the prosecution evidence. In his defence, the accused examined Muhammad Amjad (DW-1) and Muhammad A.I (DW-2) and also made his statement, on oath, under Section 340(2), Cr.P.C. Trial culminated into conviction and sentence as mentioned above.
4. The learned, counsel for the appellant in support of this appeal initially addressed the arguments on merits but considering that no such previous animosity between the complainant and the accused/appellant for which the appellant could be falsely involved in such an offence and further it was also not repellent to common sense that a women would put her modesty to question just to falsely involve the accused/appellant, the learned counsel switched over to his alternate prayer that he would not challenge the conviction, however, prayed for reduction in the quantum of sentence on the ground that accused/appellant has already suffered the pangs and ordeals of investigation, trial and now he is facing this appeal since 2007, as such, he being first offender a lenient view may be taken by reducing the sentence to the period already undergone by him.
5. The learned DPG on the other hand has opposed the above submissions by contending that already a lenient view has been taken with regard to the quantum of sentence qua the appellant.
6. I have considered the respective arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned DPG and perused the available record with their assistance.
7. The learned trial Court, after proper and correct appraisal of the entire evidence has held the appellant to be guilty and no misreading or non-reading of evidence could be found to justify interference in the conviction of the petitioner. The victim as well as other witnesses fully supported each other on material aspect, therefore, in my view the learned counsel for the appellant has very rightly chosen not to assail the conviction, the same is upheld accordingly. In such circumstances, the August Supreme Court in the case of Ghulam Rasool and another vs. The State (1999 M LD 3085) held that contention of accused was that matter had been compromised between parties outside Court and that complainant had also forgiven them they could be acquitted of charge in acceptance of compromise--Legality of Compromise--Offence for which accused had been convicted and sentenced being not compoundable, accused could not be acquitted on basis of compromise arrived at between parties. Accused, however, being, first offender and raw 'youth of impressionable age and appeared to have committed offence due to juvenile delinquency, conviction of accused was maintained, but in view of better future relations of parties, sentence awarded to accused was reduced to already undergone. Likewise, in another case of similar nature, the August Supreme Court in the case of Khan Said and 3 others us. The .State (2003 P.Cr.LJ 531) held that Compromise -- victim girl as well as her father (complainant) had forgiven the accused and compromised the matter and prayed for reduction in the sentences awarded to accused by trial Court - Federal Shariat Court keeping in view the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, facts of the case and better future relations of both sides maintained the convictions of accused, but substantially reduced their sentences from 15 years RI to 4 years RI and from imprisonment for life to that of already undergone with reduction in fine,
8. Coming to the question of sentence, it has been observed that instant case was registered against Mushtaq Ahmed accused/appellant in the year 2007, he firstly faced the pangs of investigation and trial; remained confined in Jail during trial and also remained under incarceration after conviction till suspension of his sentence by this Court on 10.09.2012, as such, quite sufficient period has already been served out by the appellant, therefore, as an acccumulative effect of all above discussion, the sentence of a imprisonment which the appellant has already undergone is taken sufficient to meet the ends of justice and the same is modified accordingly. With above modifications in the quantum of sentence, this criminal appeal is dismissed. He is on bail by way of suspension of his sentence. His sureties are discharged from his liabilities.