Lawyers Directory Listing
Unlock direct contact details for up to 10 lawyers so you can call or WhatsApp the right legal professional and move your matter forward with confidence.
Criminal Appeal No. 21 of 1986, decided on 28th February, 1987.
‑‑‑S. 377‑‑Sentence, reduction in‑‑Appellants raw youths of impressionable age, having unblemished past and appearing to have committed offence due to juvenile delinquency and their detention in jail for a longer period fraught with risk of leading them further astray‑ Sentence of four years' R.I. reduced to 2 years' R.I. in circumstances.‑ [Age‑‑Sentence].
Iqbal Ahmad for Appellant.
Malik Muhammad Aslam for the State.
Date of hearing: 28th February, 1987.
This order shall dispose of two appeals bearing Nos. 21 of 1986 and 40 of 1986 filed by Muhammad Sajid alias Muna, aged 17 years and Khalid Mahmood, aged 19 years, respectively against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rawalpindi, dated 1st of February, 1986 whereby they were convicted under section 377, P.P.C. and sentenced each to suffer R.I. for four years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000 or in default to undergo R.I. for a further period of one year. It was directed that the fine, if realized, be deposited in the Government treasury. They were given benefit of the provisions of section 382‑B, Cr.P.C.
2. The prosecution case against the appellants is that on 13th of May. 1984 at about 6/7 p.m. Kamran, aged about 9/10 years, alongwith other boys, was flying kite on the roof of the Awami Super Market, Rawalpindi. The appellants also came there and joined in the kite flying. When the other boys went away and Kamran was left alone, the appellants took him to a bath room in the down floor and there they committed unnatural offence with him.
3. Learned counsel for the appellants do not assail the conviction of the appellants. They, however, pray for reduction in the sentence on the ground that the appellants are raw youths of impressionable age and unblemished past and appear to have committed the offence due to juvenile delinquency and that their detention in jail for a longer period is fraught with a risk of leading them further astray. Learned counsel for the State has no objection to the reduction in the sentence.
4. In the circumstances, the conviction of the appellants is maintained I but the sentence awarded to them is reduced from R.I. for a period of four years to R.I. for a period of two years each. The fine imposed on them is I also reduced from Rs.5,000 to Rs.2,500 each or in default to undergo R.I for a further period of six months each. They shall, however, be entitled to the benefit of the provisions of section 382‑B, Cr.P.C.
With the above reduction in the quantum of sentence, both the appeals are dismissed.
S.G.D./M‑71/L Order accordingly.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer