' CH. IFTIKHAR HUSSAIN, J.---Abdul Rauf, the appellant by way of the instant appeal has assailed his conviction and sentence recorded by Mr. Abdul Sattar, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Multan, vide his judgment dated 26-6-2001 in the case F.I.R. No.21 dated 31-5-1998, under section 9- C, Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, registered with Police Station, Anti-Narcotic Force, Multan.
2. Briefly the facts relevant for the disposal of the same are that the appellant was challaned to Court in the above said case to face trial in an offence under section 9-C, Control of Narcotic Substances, Act, 1997 for having been found in possession of 2.Kg. 500 grams of Charas and Rs.2,220 as sale proceeds of the same. On 31-5-1998 at about 5-00 a.m. Outside his house situated in Katchi Abadi, Chah Thahlay Wala within the area of the aforesaid police station.
3. He was formally charged under section 9-C, Control of Narcotic Substances, Act, 1997. He pleaded not guilty.
4. The prosecution at his trial examined Sajjad-Tariq, Constable (P. W . 1), Muhammad Aslam, Inspector (P.W.2), Muhammad Azam Khan, S.-I. (P.W.3), Wakeel Ahmad, Lance Niik (P.W.4) and Shabbir Asad, A.S.-L (P.W.5).
5. The report of the Chemical Examiner was tendered in evidence as Exh. P. D .
6. He in his examination under section 342, Cr.P.C. Denied the recovery of the said quantity of Charas as well as the sale proceeds from him. He pleaded innocence and attributed his involvement in the case to Karwai of Anti-Narcotic. Force in order to show efficiency. He however, neither led evidence in defence nor deposed on oath in disproof of the allegation appearing against him in the prosecution evidence.
7. The learned trial Court after hearing the parties came to the conclusion that the charge against him stands proved as per prosecution evidence on record. It with the same vide the impugned judgment convicted him under section 9-C, C.N.S.A., 1997 and sentenced to undergo 10 years' R.I. In the same and to pay fine of Rs.5,00,000 and in default thereof to suffer further one year S.I. He was also extended the benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C.
8. He feeling aggrieved of his conviction and sentence has come up with the instant appeal.
9. We have heard his learned counsel as well as the learned State Counsel.
10. His learned counsel at the very outset has very frankly submitted that he does not assail his conviction and rather only requests for the reduction in his sentence on the ground that he has suffered sufficient detention as convict and under trial prisoner and due to the same his family is badly suffering financially and otherwise while he is first offender as mentioned by the learned trial Court in it's judgment.
11. As against the same, the learned State counsel has supported the impugned judgment.
12. We have carefully considered the submissions made from both sides with the help of available record.
13. As said above, the appellant's side has not assailed his conviction and only A requested for reduction in his sentence on the above mentioned grounds.
14. The non-assailing of his conviction was right approach to his case from his side. As we fmd that the prosecution in the instant case has produced five witnesses in support of it's case. Sajjad Tariq, Constable (P.W.1) has deposed about the safe custody and dispatch of the sealed parcel pertaining to this case to the office of the Chemical Examiner. Muhammad Aslam, Inspector (P.W.2) has deposed about the recovery of Charas in the above quantity from him as well as the sale proceeds mentioned-above and also his investigation. Muhammad Azam, S.-L (P.W.3) has also deposed about the recovery of Charas in the above quantity IB and the aforementioned sale proceeds from him. Similarly, Wakeel Ahmad, Lance Naik (P.W.4).
15. Shabbir Asad, A.S.-I. (P.W.5) has recorded the formal F.I.R. Exh.'1313/1 in the instant case. He also deposed about the safe custody of the sealed parcel of the Charas and it's onward transmission to the office of the Chemical Examiner, Multan, intact. He also deposed about the safe custody of the said sale proceeds.
16. They except Wakeel Ahmad, Lance Naik (P.W.4) are members of the Anti-Narcotic Force while the said Wakeel Ahmad is from the Pakistan Army. They all were unanimous that the narcotic substances in the above quantity and the sale proceeds were recovered from his possession on the above said date, time and place. There is nothing in their evidence. From which it could be said that they have deposed falsely against him. His plea of innocence and attribution of the case to A.N.F.'s Karwai to efficiency is devoid of any force as nothing in support of the same has been produced. So, in his case, it is not understandable that why these Government officials will involve him falsely in the instant case. Anyway, the answer to such a question can certainly be in the negative, . Particularly, when he as mentioned above did not adduce any evidence.
17. So, we concur with the learned trial Court that the prosecution as per it's evidence on record has succeeded in proving the charge against him. His conviction under section 9-C, C.N.S:A. 1997, thus is maintained.
18. As regards the question of reduction in his sentence, we find that he was convicted almost two years back. According to his side, he has also suffered the detention as under trial prisoner as well convict in the instant case. So, it is well imagined that family of a detained person definitely suffers financially and otherwise.
19. Besides than this, he is a first offender as mentioned by the learned trial Court itself in the impugned judgment. So, we have been persuaded to reduce his sentence. The same therefore, is reduced to seven years from 10 years R.I. However, the sentence of fine to him is maintained. With the above reduction in his sentence, we dismiss the instant appeal.