1. ' Appellant Atta Muhammad son of Didari Shaikh aged 28 years has filed this appeal against the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi convicting him to undergo three months R. I.
2. Under section 4(1) and (2) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947, the sentences however have been directed to run concurrently.
3. ' The prosecution case briefly stated is that All Akbar Khan Batoch, Inspector of Special Police Establishment, State Bank Circle, Karachi on receiving reliable information that certain persons were carrying on illegal trade in Foreign Exchange on the footpaths in Boulton Market Area deputed Abdul Razak (P. W. 3) to contact the persons concerned. He had earlier obtained the requisite permission for investigation in this behalf. P. W. Abdul Razak afterwards informed Inspector Ali Akbar Khan that he settled a bargain with the appellant who was willing to sell 5 at the rate of Rs, 20 each and the deal was postponed to the next day at 12-30 p.m. A trap was accordingly organised under which P. W. Abdul Razak was deputed in the company of Akhtar Nizami Mashir to purchase the Foreign Exchange English currency from the appellant. In this behalf Abdul Razak was handed over tainted notes in Pakistan currency of the value of Rs,
110. P. Ws. Abdul Razak and Akhtar Nizami are said to have approached the appellant who sold them the Foreign currency, and during the transaction Inspector All Akbar Khan came to the spot, on a previously arranged signal, and secured the t -inted money from the pocket of the appellant. After obtaining the requisite permission from the State Bank of Pakistan, the appellant was sent up for trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, who convicted him as stated earlier.
4. The learned counsel for the appellant contended that even if the appeal! Fails on merits, the question of sentence imposed upon the appellant may be sympathetically considered, particularly in view of the fact that the criminal prosecution has dragged against him for about 5 years. I find great force in this aspect of the case While finding no merit in the appeal in respect of the prosecution evidence connecting the appellant with the crime, I feel that reduction in the quantum of sentence would adequately meet and justify the ends of justice in this case. The learned counsel for the State referred to the case of State Bank of Pakistan v. Abdul Sattar (1) in which their Lordships of the Supreme Court refrained from passing the substantive jail term, on reversing the acquittal of the accused by the High Court, and modified the sentence to the period of imprisonment already undergone but enhanced the fine from Rs, 5,000 to Rs, 10,000. In that case Foreign-exchange worth about Rs, 12,000, in terms of Pakistan currency at the official rate, was not repatriated by the accused. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of this case, I feel that if the substantive Jail sentences are replaced by imposition of Rs, 50 as fines on each count the ends of justice would be adequately met with subject to this modification in the sentence, the appeal is otherwise dismissed. In default of the payment of fines as above, the appellant will however undergo simple jail term of six months on each count. {{FOOT NOTE}}
(1) 1968 SCM R 283 {{FOOT NOTE}}