Mst. RASHIDAN BIBI vs THE STATE
The petitioner, Mst. Rashidan Bibi, convicted under Section 308 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 and sentenced to 14 years rigorous imprisonment along with a payment of diyat, filed an application under Section 426 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 seeking suspension of her sentence pending appeal. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to the suspension of her sentence given the duration of her incarceration and her personal circumstances. The Court observed that the petitioner had been incarcerated continuously since 16-11-1998, having served more than half of her sentence, and noted that there was no immediate likelihood of the main appeal being heard. Furthermore, the Court considered the petitioner's status as a woman with two dependent children lacking alternative care. Consequently, the Court held that the sentence should be suspended, allowing the petitioner to be released on bail subject to furnishing bail bonds. The key principle established is that prolonged incarceration without a near-future prospect of appeal hearing, coupled with compelling personal circumstances such as the welfare of dependent children, constitutes valid grounds for the suspension of a sentence under Section 426 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898.
- Can a sentence be suspended under Section 426 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 if the main appeal is not likely to be heard in the near future?
- Does the fact that a convict has served more than half of their sentence constitute a ground for suspension of sentence pending appeal?
- Can the personal circumstances of a female convict, specifically the care of dependent children, be considered for the suspension of a sentence?
- Section 308, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 426, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' Mst. Rashidan Bibi petitioner was convicted under section 308, P.P.C. And sentenced to 14 years R.I.; and also to pay Rs.3,00,000 as diyat to the legal heirs of the deceased by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Burewala vide judgment dated 12-3-2003. Through this application under section 426, Cr.P.C. The petitioner seeks suspension of her above-said sentence.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is behind the bars since 16-11-1998 continuously and has served more than half sentence in jail. It is further contended that the petitioner has two sons and nobody is behind to look after them.
' Learned State counsel opposes this petition.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the impugned judgment. The petitioner is behind the bars since 16-11-1998 continuously and there is no likelihood of hearing of the main appeal in near future. The petitioner is a woman and she has two sons to whom she has to bring up but nobody is behind to look after her children. Hence, this application is accepted and sentence of the petitioner is suspended. Consequently, petitioner shall be released on bail subject to her furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 with on surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial. Court. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.