This appeal is directed against the Judgment of II Additional Sessions Judge and F. E. R. Tribunal, Karachi, dated 19th February 1970, whereby all the four present appellants, who ate admittedly partners of a firm were tried and convicted under section 11/13 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation 'Act, 1947, appellants Muhammad Ayub, Muhammad Abdul Sattar and Abdul Razzak were sentenced to suffer one month's S. I. And a fine of Rs. 1,000 each and in default to suffer two months'
S. I., appellant S. K. Khaliq was sentenced to suffer three months' S. I. And a fine of Rs. 2,000 or in default three months' S. I.
2. Briefly the facts are that sometime in 1965, appellants' partnership firm sent Rubber-washers and watch straps to Dubai against GRPI No. 544803 and 54169 Exhs. 2- & 3 and declared the values as Rs. 960 and Rs. 1,300 respectively. They gave undertaking under the rules to repatriate the sale proceeds to Pakistan through First National City Bank, Karachi, but failed to comply with the undertaking. It may be noted that the goods were sent to a firm at Dubai, whose proprietor is S. K.
Khaliq, one of the appellants. Show-cause notices were issued to them, investigation conducted and a complaint was filed before the trial Judge and the appellants were convicted as above. The appellants admitted in their statements before the trial Court the exporting of the goods and delay in repatriation of the sale proceeds. This fact was further evidence by the statement of P. W. 2 Muhammad Abdul Hamid and by Exh. 13, a letter of Shahmir Rshman, Assistant Controller of Imports and Exports, as well as statement of Assistant Manager of the First National City Bank and other Documentary evidence on record.
3. I have heard Mr. Amer Ahmed Khan, Advocate, for the appellants and Mr. Muhammad Yousuf Manion, Advocate, for the State. The only point argued by counsel for the appellants before me was a submission with regard to reduction of sentence on the ground the delay to repatriate the sale proceeds within the time of four months was not intentional on the part of the appellants as it has become beyond their control to do so due to non---availability of the market to sell the goods within time in Dubai. He next submitted, supported by an affidavit of the appellant that after their conviction the above amounts of Rs. 960 and Rs. 1,300 were realized or received in Pakistan on or about 22nd August 1970, concerning the items in this case i.e. GRPI Nos. 541469 for Rs. 300 and GKPI No. 544803 for Rs. 960. With regard to unsold goods namely, watch straps for Rs. 1,000 it is submitted as per bill of lading, have already been received back in Pakistan from Dubai and are lying with the Collector of Customs, Karachi, as per letter dated 15-2-1971, of their Clearing and Forwarding Agents. In this regard proceeds certificates of their Bankers showing the repatriation of the amounts have been filed and it was finally submitted that there was no intention offence and beged to be excused. Counsel had to concede that there is sufficient evidence on record with regard to delay of repatriation of the sale proceeds to Pakistan within the stipulated period of four months. This is in violation of the Foreign Exchange Rules and it is also apparent on the record that the appellants had attempted to avoid to repatriate the amounts but when the pro--ceedings were taken against them, they tried and did repatriate the amounts in dispute to Pakistan as referred above ; therefore the offence against the appellants stands proved. The offence relate to the year 1965 and the appellants must have suffered sufficiently during these long protracted proceedings and they had ultimately repatriated the amounts to Pakistan. I consider this as mitigating circumstances and accept the submission of the counsel for the appellants to which counsel for the State agrees, and alter the sentence only to the fines which are to be paid within one month and in default of payment of fines, each has to undergo three months' S. I.
4. The appeal is dismissed subject to the above modification.