MUHAMMAD RAMZAN alias DHURLA vs THE STATE
This matter arises from a criminal petition for suspension of sentence and grant of post-arrest bail filed by Muhammad Ramzan alias Dhurla, who was convicted under section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 and sentenced to imprisonment for life along with other penalties by the trial court. The core legal question concerns the sufficiency and re-appraisal of prosecution evidence—specifically relating to the identity of a headless recovered skeleton and a joint extra-judicial confession—at the interim stage of suspending a sentence pending appeal. The Lahore High Court held that the material forming the basis of the conviction requires a thorough re-appraisal at the final hearing of the appeal, which is likely to take considerable time. Consequently, the court allowed the petition, suspended the petitioner's sentence, and directed his release on bail subject to furnishing surety bonds. The key principle laid down is that where the conviction rests on weak identification evidence of a decomposed body and a joint extra-judicial confession, and the appeal is likely to be delayed, the sentence may be suspended and bail granted pending final adjudication.
- Whether the sentence of a convict can be suspended and bail granted when the appeal is likely to take considerable time for final hearing?
- Can a conviction based on a headless skeleton and a joint extra-judicial confession be considered for suspension of sentence pending appeal?
- Whether the uncorroborated identity of a decomposed dead body warrants the suspension of a life imprisonment sentence?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 201, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 544-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' The petitioner Muhammad Ramzan alias Dhurla son of Mansab along with his co-accused Muhammad Zaman and Sher Muhammad was tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, at Mianwali in case F.I.R. No,30, dated 13-3-2003, registered at Police Station Wan Bhachran, District Mianwali, for offences under sections 302/201/34, P.P.C. He along with his co-accused Muhammad Zaman vide judgment, dated 8-12-2003 was convicted under section 302, P.P.C. And sentenced to imprisonment for life as Tazir. They were ordered to pay compensation of Rs,1, 00,000 each (Rupees one lace only) under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. To the legal heirs of the deceased and in default in the payment to suffer sentence of six months' S.I. Each. Benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Had been extended to them. However, their co accused namely Muhammad Sher was acquitted of the charges by giving him the benefit of doubt through the same judgment.
2. I have heard Malik Amir Muhammad Joya, the learned counsel for the petitioner/appellants, as also Mr. Tanvir Ahmad Shami, Advocate for the State and have perused the record.
3. It has been observed that a dead body had been recovered in the form of a headless skeleton only. The evidence available with the prosecution was that a dead body was found in the reeds with a National Identity Card lying nearby which belonged to the deceased. According to the doctor the dead body must have taken one to two months to reach the stage of putrefaction in which it had been found. Apart from the National Identity Card and a torn shirt also allegedly belonging to the deceased there was nothing on record to establish identity of the deceased.
There is a joint extra-judicial confession which also found favor with the learned trial Court in recording the conviction against the petitioner/appellant. The material on the basis of which the conviction has been recorded needs re-appraisal at the time of final hearing of the appeal, which obviously is likely to take sometime.
4. Resultantly, this petition is allowed and by suspending the sentence of the petitioner I direct that he be released on bail provided he furnishes bail bond in the sum of Rs,50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of D.R. (Judl.) of this Court.