SHAHID and 4 others vs THE STATE
This criminal miscellaneous petition was filed by Shahid Liaqat and four others seeking suspension of their sentences and release on bail during the pendency of their appeal before the Lahore High Court. The core legal question was whether the petitioners are entitled to suspension of sentence and bail as of right when convicted of a bailable offence. The court observed that the trial court itself concluded the petitioners did not share a common object regarding the murder in issue, and that they were convicted under section 337-A(i) of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, which is a bailable offence. The court held that in cases of conviction for bailable offences, suspension of sentence and bail are to be granted as of right, noting also the short sentences and the unlikelihood of an early hearing of the main appeal. The petition was accordingly allowed, the sentences were suspended, and the petitioners were admitted to bail upon furnishing appropriate surety bonds.
- Whether suspension of sentence in a bailable offence is granted as of right?
- Can a convict be released on bail during the pendency of an appeal when the sentence is short and an early hearing is unlikely?
- Are petitioners convicted of a bailable offence entitled to bail under section 496 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Section 337-A(i), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 426(2-A), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 496, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS NO.1 OF 2004.
' Through this miscellaneous petition Shahid Liaqat, Shafqat, Sadaqat and Yameen petitioners- appellants have sought suspension of their sentences and release on bail during the pendency of their appeal before this Court.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the judgment passed by the learned trial Court we have observed that the learned trial Court had itself concluded that the petitioners did not share common object with their co-convict regarding the murder in issue. The petitioners were attributed simple injuries to some witnesses and they had been convicted by the learned trial Court for an offence under section 337-A(i), P.P.C. Which offence is bailable. The provisions of section 426 (2-A) and section 496, Cr.P.C. As well as the judgment in the cases of Hata and others v. The State (PLD 1967 Lahore 1302), Shah Hussain v. State (1995 PCr.LJ 209), Mian Mahmud Ali Qasuri and others v. The State (PLD 1963 SC 478), Shamshad Ali v. The State (1988 PCr.LJ 2078) and Ghulam Sarwar v. The State (2003 PCr.LJ 1714) show that in cases of conviction for bailable offence suspension of sentence is to be granted as of right. Even otherwise the sentences of imprisonment passed against the petitioners by the learned trial Court are quite short and there is no prospect of an early hearing of the main appeal. This miscellaneous petition is, therefore, allowed, the sentences of the petitioners passed by the learned trial Court are suspended and the petitioners are admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.