1. Perusal of the judgment of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Attock of 7-9-1991 delivered in Criminal Appeal No.28/91, under supervisory Constitutional jurisdiction revealed that the respondent, having been convicted and sentenced by the trial Magistrate on 27-2-1991 in the case registered vide FIR No.187 of 30-9-1987 under section 279/337/304-A. P.P.C. At Police Station Hassan Abdal to imprisonment of one year R.I. With a fine of Rs3,000 for causing death of Niaz Muhammad through rash and negligent driving of bus No. AJK-A/7785, on appeal without contesting the conviction confined his submission to the reduction of sentence which was allowed and the sentence of imprisonment was reduced to already undergone viz., 13 days, ex facie resulting into miscarriage of justice; consequently, in exercise of suo motu revisional jurisdiction notice was issued to the respondent to show cause why the sentence should not be enhanced; during the course of hearing whereof his learned counsel submitted that the respondent did not record any statement before the appellate Court for not contesting the conviction and the sentence already undergone coupled with the agony of protracted trial has sufficiently met the interests of justice, with which I am not persuaded; the first contention seems to have been advanced in oblivion of the fact that the respondent being admittedly the beneficiary of the impugned order never questioned its legality thus is a convenient afterthought and merits to be ignored with the contempt it deserves. Recourse to the theory of already undergone on the facts and circumstances of the case has outrageously undermined the punitive and deterrent aspect of criminal administration of justice as a patent demonstration of judicial perversity culminating into miscarriage of justice tending to promote licensing of Highway assessinations by public carriers which is alarmingly on the increase with utter disregard for the human life; consequently, respondent's sentence is enhanced to three years' R.I. He is present in Court, should be taken into custody for serving out the outstanding sentence without availing of the benefit contemplated by section 382-B, Cr.P.C.
2. M.B.A./S-59/1, Sentence enhanced.