' The petitioners, Sultan alias Jagga son of Mahni and Zulfiqar alias Zulli son of Shamira, were convicted by the learned A.C./S.D.M., Kamalia under section 411, P.P.C. And were sentenced to undergo one year's R.I. Each and a fine of Rs,1,000 each or in default thereof to undergo further S.I.
For three months vide his judgment, dated 17-11-1987. The petitioners challenged their conviction and sentence by filing appeal which was heard and dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge, Toba Tek Singh on 9-1-1988.
2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that three months before 4-11-1984 a buffalo worth Rs,10,000 and a calf aged two months worth Rs,500 owned by Muhammad Shah complainant were stolen from his cattle shed within the area of Chak No, 723/G.B., District Toba Tek Singh. The theft took place during the night time. The petitioners are stated to have admitted that they have stolen the cattle of the complainant referred to above. On 4-11-1984, the complainant came to know that some thieves have been apprehended at Police Station Kamalia. Accordingly, the complainant went to the police station and there he found his buffalo and calf in the custody of the police.
Muhammad Shah complainant P.W.1, Zameer Shah P.W.2, Muhammad Yaqub P.W.3, Manzoor Naqi P.W.4, Muhammad Shafiq P.W.5 and Manzoor Ahmad P.W.6 were produced by the prosecution to prove its case. The petitioners while making statements under section 342, Cr.P.C. Denied the allegation leveled against them. The learned trial Court believed the prosecution evidence and convicted and sentenced the petitioners as stated earlier.
3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that he does not wish to challenge their conviction and instead he requested that the sentence of the petitioners may be reduced to the period already undergone'by them on the ground that they were not released on bail and that they have already served out their sentences substantially. Mr. S.M. Zubair, learned Additional Advocate-General has made a statement that he has no objection if the conviction of the petitioners is maintained and their sentences are reduced to the period already undergone by them. It is further admitted by the learned Law Officer that the petitioners were never released on bail and they remained in jail throughout since the date of their arrest. Learned counsel for the petitioners has also placed reliance on the order of the learned Acting Chief Justice, dated 27-6- 1988 passed in Criminal Revision No, 135 of 1988 titled Sultan alias Jagi etc. v. The State.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. From the evidence it is clear that the petitioners were rightly and correctly convicted by the learned trial Court, therefore, their conviction is hereby maintained. However, the learned Law Officer has made a concessional statement that he has no objection if the sentences of the petitioners are reduced to the period already undergone by them. From the record, it is clear that the petitioners were never released on bail since after their arrest. Accordingly, the sentence of the petitioners is reduced to the period already undergone by them. The sentences of the petitioners in this case are ordered to run concurrently along with the sentences awarded to them in the other connected criminal cases.
They shall be released forthwith provided of course they are not needed in any other criminal case.
With this modification, the criminal revision is dismissed. .