ZAFAR IQBAL and 7 others vs STATE
This criminal revision petition arises from the conviction of the petitioners under Section 392 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, wherein they were sentenced to three years of rigorous imprisonment with a fine by the Magistrate 1st Class, Layyah. Following the dismissal of their appeal by the Additional Sessions Judge, the petitioners approached the High Court seeking suspension of their sentence pending the final adjudication of the revision petition. The core legal question before the Court was whether the sentence of the petitioners should be suspended given the specific evidentiary challenges raised, namely the lack of an identification parade despite the assailants having muffled faces, and the unlikely prospect of an early hearing of the main revision petition. The Court held that the suspension of the sentence was warranted under the circumstances. The key principle laid down is that where there are arguable points regarding the identification of the accused and the main appeal or revision is unlikely to be heard in the near future, the court may exercise its discretion to suspend the sentence and grant bail to the petitioners.
- Can a sentence be suspended pending the final hearing of a criminal revision petition?
- Does the absence of an identification parade in a case involving muffled faces constitute a valid ground for suspending a sentence?
- Is the likelihood of a delayed hearing of a main revision petition a relevant factor for granting bail to a convicted person?
- Section 392, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
The petitioners vide judgment dated 26.2.2005 having been found guilty under Section 392 PPC were sentenced to three years RI each with fine of Rs. 5,000/- each by the learned Magistrate 1st Class, Layyah while extending them benefit of Section 382-B Cr.P.C. Then the appeal filed by the petitioners against the aforesaid conviction and sentence was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karor, District Layyah vide judgment dated 5.3.2005 and this revision petition was filed before this Court. Through the instant application the petitioners seek suspension of the sentence.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The main revision petition has been admitted for regular bearing on the ground that according to PW-3 the assailants were with muffled faces, but no identification parade was conducted. The petitioners have already undergone sufficient period in jail, but there is no possibility of hearing of main revision petition in the near future. Hence, the operation of impugned judgment of conviction is suspended and the petitioners shall be released on bail subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.