MALIK HAQ NAWAZ, J.---The instant appeal has been filed against the respondents/accused against order/judgment passed by the learned Special Judge, CNSA Gilgit in Sessions case No, 24/2017 whereby the respondents were convicted and awarded the punishment of the period already under gone with a fine of Rs, 30,000/-(thirty thousand).
2. The State being aggrieved from the order/judgment dated 05-05-2017 has challenging the validity/propriety of the impugned judgment/order.
3. The brief facts of the case as reflected in the FIR No, 04/2017 dated 21-03-2017 and in the judgment dated 05-05-2017 are that one kilogram charas was recovered from the possession of each of the respondents. The challan of the case was submitted on 06-04-2017 but the date has wrongly been mentioned as 06.03.2017. The notices were issued to the respondents/accused for 21- 04-2017 for their attendance. On 21-04-2017 the learned Special Prosecutor was absent and case was posted on 05-05-2017 for further proceedings. On 05-05-2017 the accused pleaded guilty and the learned trial Court accepted their plea of guilt and convicted them as stated supra. The learned Special Prosecutor for ANF stated that a lenient view has been taken by the learned trial Court which will encourage the likeminded criminals and pray that the same judgment may be set aside and the sentence of respondents be enhanced.
4. On the other hand the learned counsel for the respondents submits that the accused belongs to poor families and no useful purpose will be served if the order of learned trial Court is set aside and the respondents/accused are convicted and committed to judicial custody.
5. We heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record of the case. The accused pleaded guilty at the very outset at the time of framing of charge. We observed that there is a legal defect in the impugned judgment/order, which has not been pointed out by either of the parties. Under section 265(E), Cr.P.C. the Court is required to explain the charge against the accused and if the accused pleads guilty the court shall record the plea and may in his discretion convict him, thereon, which has been not done in the instant case.
6. However, keeping in view that the accused pleaded guilty at the time of framing charge. The Courts of the country have always taken a lenient view in such like cases. A harsh view by this Court will not advance the cause of justice and the judgment of the trial Court except the above technical defects is just and proper and we maintained the same.
7. The Appeal No, 24/2017 is dismissed being meritless.