MAQSOOD AHMAD vs THE STATE
The petitioner sought suspension of sentence and grant of bail pending the disposal of his appeal against a conviction under Section 320, Pakistan Penal Code 1860, where he was sentenced to two years imprisonment and ordered to pay Diyat and Daman. The core legal question was whether the sentence should be suspended given the bailable nature of the offence, the short duration of the sentence, and the unlikelihood of the appeal being heard in the near future. The Court held that the principles governing the grant of bail to under-trial prisoners are equally applicable to the suspension of a convict's sentence. Finding that the sentence was short, the appeal was unlikely to be heard soon, and that release would facilitate the petitioner's ability to earn funds for the payment of Diyat, the Court accepted the petition. The key principle laid down is that where a sentence is short and the appeal is unlikely to be heard promptly, the suspension of sentence is appropriate, particularly when release assists the convict in fulfilling financial obligations like Diyat.
- Are the principles governing the grant of bail to an under-trial prisoner applicable to the suspension of a convict's sentence?
- Is an offence under Section 320 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 bailable?
- Does the likelihood of a convict serving their entire sentence before the appeal is heard constitute grounds for suspension of sentence?
- Section 320, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' Maqsood Ahmad, the applicant through the instant petition has sought for suspension of, his sentence and admitting him to bail pending the disposal of his titled appeal against the judgment dated 31-72003 recorded by Mr. Imtiaz Hussain, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Narowal.
2. He vide the same was convicted under section 320, P.P.C. And sentenced to imprisonment for two years and to pay Diyat Rs,3,00,000 to the legal heirs of the deceased Abdul Ghafoor. He was further sentenced to pay Rs,10,000 as Daman to injured P.W. Abdul Sattar in case F.I.R. No,4, dated 5-1-2002 registered with Police Station, Sadar, Narowal.
3. It has been contended on his behalf that the offence under section 320, P.P.C. Is bailable; that the sentence is short; that there is no likelihood of early hearing of his appeal in the near future and it rather is very much likely that he may suffer his entire sentence before the hearing of his appeal.
4. Conversely, the learned counsel for the State has opposed the petition. He, however, has conceded that the offence under section 320, P.P.C. Is bailable and that the sentence is short.
5. I have carefully considered the submissions made by both the parties with the help of available record.
6. Admittedly the offence under section 320, P.P.C. Is bailable.
7. I may mention here that the same principles, which govern the question of grant or otherwise of bail to an under-trial prisoner are relevant as are regarding the question of suspension or otherwise of sentence of a convict.
8. His sentence is also short while there is no likelihood of early hearing of his appeal in the near future and rather it is very much likely that he may suffer his entire sentence in jail before the hearing of his appeal.
9. Even otherwise his release would facilitate to enable him to earn for payment of Diyat. In this regard reference is made to the case of Abdul Hameed v. The State 2001 M LD 1577.
10. I, therefore, have been persuaded to suspend his sentence. The petition, therefore, is accepted and his sentence is suspended and he pending the disposal of his appeal is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,3,00,000 (Rupees three lacs) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.
Cited by 3 cases
- SAFDAR SHAH Versus State 2022 YLRN 135
- Khamiso alias JOGI and another vs The State 2020 MLD 1614
- AMMAR FAROOQ vs THE STATE 2013 PLD Sindh 508