MUHAMMAD FARRUKH MAHMUD, J.- Rab Nawaz son of Abdul Rahman was sent-up to face trial along with co-accused Haji Mushtaq Ahmad in case FIR No. 99/1996 registered at P.S. City Haroonabad on 15.4.1996 for offences under Sections 324/337/334/34, PPC. After conclusion of trial, the learned Trial Court, vide judgment dated 11.5.2001, acquitted co-accused Haji Mushtaq Ahmad, but convicted the appellant for offence under Section 336, PPC and sentenced him thereunder to seven years' R.I. As Tazir. Arsh equivalent to one-half of Diyat under Section 337-R, PPC was also imposed upon the appellant. The Arsh was to be paid to the victim Abdul Hameed PW-1. It was further ordered that the appellant would pay the amount of Arsh in three instalments spreading over a period of three years from the date of judgment. Benefit of Section 382-B, Cr.P.C, was extended to the appellant.
2. Feeling aggrieved the appellant through jail challenged his conviction and sentence by filing the appeal, which was registered as Criminal Appeal No. 83/2001. During the pendency of the appeal, the appellant engaged learned counsel Mr. M. Shamsher Iqbal Chughtai, Advocate, who represented him.
3. While dictating the judgment, it has been noticed that Rab Nawaz appellant was convicted and sentenced in three cases bearing FIRs Nos. 271/1996, 99/1996 and 279/1996, all registered at P.S. City Haroonabad, District Bahawalnagar. He challenged his convictions and sentences by filing a single appeal through Superintendent, District Jail, Bahawalnagar. The office as mentioned above registered the appeal as Criminal Appeal No. 83/2001. The aforementioned appeal would be treated to be filed against the conviction of the appellant relating to case FIR No. 99/1996 and the same is being decided through this judgment. The office would assign a different number to the appeal relating to case FIR No. 271/1996 and the learned counsel for the appellant would be informed through written notice and through telephone accordingly. As far as the conviction of Rab Nawaz in case FIR No. 279/1996 is concerned, the appeal can only be filed before the Court of Session. Rab Nawaz appellant would be informed accordingly through Superintendent, District jail, Bahawalnagar.
4. Precisely the allegation against the appellant in the Instant case (FIR No. 99/1996) was that he, while armed with a pistol 12-bore, fired at Abdul Hameed complainant PW-1. The i.e hit at the legs of the complainant and subsequently due to the injuries caused by the appellant right leg of the complainant had to be amputated. During trial, the prosecution produced eight witnesses to prove its case.
5. The learned counsel for the appellant has, at the very outset, submitted that he would not press this appeal on the merits and would pray for reduction in the sentence.
6. 1 have gone through the entire record of the case and the impugned judgment. The learned counsel has rightly not pressed this appeal on merits, as PW-1, who received the injury, gave a straight forward account of the Occurrence and his testimony was duly corroborated by the statement of Dr. Muhammad Amin who appeared as PW-4. In the circumstances, I maintain the conviction of the appellant under Section 336, PPC. However, quantum of sentence requires a serious thought. It has been noticed that the appellant was arrested in the instant case on 29.11.1996 and had remained in jail throughout, i.e. More than six years. He did not report his shot and was acquitted of the charge under Section 324, PPC. There was no previous enmity between the complainant and the appellant and the occurrence had taken place after an altercation between the parties ever tum of water. Therefore, I reduce the sentence from seven years' R.I. To that already served out by the appellant. The sentence of Arsh is maintained. With the modification in the sentence, this appeal stands dismissed.