Imran Khan vs State Ss — 2025 PCrLJ 1865 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Imran Khan VS State Ss. 9(d) & 11(c)---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss. 35 & 397---Possession of narcotic substances---Appreciation of evidence---Punishment---Concurrence of sentences---According to the impugned judgment, the Trial Court awarded sentences to the appellant consecutively---Section 35,Cr.P.C., is abundantly clear that more than one sentences awarded in a single trial are to run one after the other, i.e. consecutively, unless specifically directed by the Court for them to run concurrently---Said section of law also provides that in no case the consecutive sentence awarded in multiple offences should be beyond a period of 14 years---Whenever a consecutive sentence awarded in a particular case is found to last beyond the period of 14 years, the same has been held to be bad in law and Courts have directed the sentences in those cases to run concurrently---Besides, award of sentences in criminal cases and direction for them to run consecutively or concurrently is the discretion of the court which it may exercise judiciously keeping in view the overall circumstances of each case---Courts in Pakistan generally take charitable view in the matters of sentences affecting deprivation of life or liberty of a person and unless some aggravating circumstances do not permit so, they liberally exercise enabling powers under Ss.35 & 397, Cr.P.C., respectively to order concurrent running of sentence in one trial and so also consolidation of earlier sentence while handing down sentence of imprisonment in a subsequent trial---As the Court had already taken a lenient view while reducing substantive sentences awarded to the appellant owing to his young age, clean past and bright chances of reformation, it was further ordered and held that both the sentences awarded to appellant upon conviction under Ss.9(d) and 11(c) of the Act were to run concurrently and not consecutively---Appeal was partially allowed. Citation Name: 2025 PCrLJ 1865 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTBookmark this Case Imran Khan VS State Ss. 9(d) & 11(c)---Possession of narcotic substances---Appreciation of evidence---Sentence, quantum of---Mitigating circumstances---According to the impugned judgment, the appellant had been found guilty and convicted for recovery of 02-kilograms of heroin and awarded sentence of imprisonment for six years and also convicted for the recovery of 03-kilograms of ICE and awarded sentence of imprisonment for 14-years---Sentence of imprisonment awarded in terms of its duration should always be commensurate to the gravity of offence proven and other attending circumstances like age of the convict, previous history and involvement in crime and chances of reformation etc.---In cases of recovery of narcotics, the quantum of sentence should be dependent upon the nature of the contraband recovered as well as the quantity of the recovery made from the accused person---Appellant was arrested and had been convicted for the offence in hand at quite a young age---As per card of arrest, he was just 22 years of age when he was arrested---Admittedly, appellant had no past criminal record to his discredit---Primary object behind punishment for an offence should be to reform the individual as well, apart from retribution and deterrence---Keeping in view the young age of the appellant coupled with the fact that he had no previous history of his involvement in criminal cases were glaring factors which were sufficient to attract favorable consideration for reducing the quantum of sentence awarded in the instant case---Resultantly, the sentence of 6 years RI awarded to the appellant for offence under S.9(d) of the Act for recovery of 2kg heroin was ordered to be maintained as it was in consonance with the approved sentence policy---Likewise, the sentence of 14-years RI upon conviction of appellant under S.11(c) of the Act was reduced to six years RI---Appeal was partially allowed.

Imran Khan vs State Ss — 2025 PCrLJ 1865 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PCRLJ