SHAH NAWAZ vs THE STATE
This criminal appeal arises from the conviction of the appellant under the Pakistan Arms Ordinance, 1965, where he was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three years along with a fine. The core legal question concerns the suspension of sentence and grant of bail pending the decision of a first appeal where the appellant has already served a substantial portion of the sentence during the trial and the appeal is likely to take considerable time for final adjudication. The court held that since the appeal requires detailed scrutiny of evidence and is likely to be delayed, and given that the State counsel has no objection, the sentence should be suspended and the appellant released on bail. The key principle laid down is that where an appellant has already undergone a significant period of incarceration during trial and the main appeal cannot be heard expeditiously, the sentence of imprisonment may be suspended pending the appeal.
- Whether the sentence of imprisonment can be suspended during the pendency of a first appeal when the appellant has already served a substantial part of the sentence during trial?
- Does the lack of objection from the State counsel warrant the suspension of sentence and release on bail pending appeal?
- Is an appellant entitled to the benefit of section 382-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 upon conviction?
- Section 13(d), Pakistan Arms Ordinance 1965
- Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
1. ' ALI SAIN DINO METLO, J.-1 and 2. Heard Messrs Jai Jai Veshno, Advocate for applicant and Muhammad Ismaii Bhutto, State Counsel. The latter has no objection to the admission of appeal and suspension of sentence.
2. ' It is first appeal and entire evidence has to be scrutinized,. The appeal is, therefore, admitted for hearing. Call R&Ps and prepare paper book.
3. The appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under section 13(d) of the Pakistan Arms Ordinance, 1965, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs,5,000 or in default to undergo simple imprisonment for two months more. However, he was given benefit of section 382-B, of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 and a period of about two and half years, he remained in custody during trial, was ordered to be deducted from the substantive sentence and in this way the period for which he has to remain in jail comes out to be about six or seven months.
4. ' The appeal is likely to take a long time for its decision on merits.. In such circumstances, the sentence is suspended and the appellant is directed to be released on bail on furnishing one surety in the sum of Rs,50,000 and personal bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of Additional Registrar of this Court pending decision of the appeal. 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.