TANVIR AHMAD vs THE STATE
This criminal petition was filed by the petitioner seeking suspension of a five-year sentence awarded by the Additional Sessions Judge, Burewala, on 10-5-2005. The core legal question was whether the petitioner's sentence should be suspended pending the hearing of his main appeal, given the duration of his pre-trial incarceration and the unlikelihood of an early appeal hearing. The Court held that, without delving into the merits of the case, the sentence should be suspended. The ratio of the decision rests on the principle that where a convict has already served a significant portion of their sentence during the trial and the main appeal is not expected to be heard in the near future, the suspension of the sentence is a valid exercise of judicial discretion. The Court ordered the petitioner's release subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000 with two sureties to the satisfaction of the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of the Court, with the condition that the petitioner must appear on every date of hearing.
- Can a sentence be suspended pending the hearing of a main appeal if the convict has already served a significant period of incarceration during the trial?
- Does the unlikelihood of an early hearing of a main appeal constitute a valid ground for the suspension of a sentence?
- Section 382, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 319, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' MUHAMMAD NAWAZ BHATTI, J.---Through this petition the petitioner has sought suspension of sentence awarded to him vide judgment, dated 10-5-2005 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Burewala, whereby he convicted and sentenced the petitioner to imprisonment for 5 years'
R.I. And Diyat, benefit of section 382, Cr.P.C. Has also been awarded to the petitioner.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the sentence awarded to the convict/petitioner is harsh one and does not fullfill the requirement of law. Further submits that section 319, P.P.C. Does not constitute that convict/petitioner was taken into custody soon after the judgment and he also remained in the jail for almost one year during the trial. He has relied on Zahid Hussain v. The State PLD 2005 Lah.
644.
3. On the other hand learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the petition.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The convict/petitioner had been in jail for more than one year during the trial and there is no possibility of hearing of the main appeal in the near future. In view of the above circumstances and without going into the merits of the case in detail I suspend the petitioner's sentence subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 (rupees one lac only) with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of Deputy Registrar (Judi.) of this Court. Petitioner shall appear on each and every date before this Court.
Zahid Hussain v. The State PLD 2005 Lah. 644 ref.