ZAFAR IQBAL and 7 others vs THE STATE
This criminal revision petition was filed by the petitioners challenging their conviction and sentence under Section 392 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, which had been upheld by the appellate court. The petitioners sought the suspension of their sentence pending the final adjudication of the revision petition. The core legal question before the High Court was whether the sentence should be suspended given the specific evidentiary challenges raised, namely the lack of an identification parade despite the assailants having muffled faces, and the delay in the hearing of the main revision petition. The Court held that the operation of the impugned judgment of conviction should be suspended and the petitioners released on bail. The key principle laid down is that where there is a significant evidentiary issue, such as the failure to conduct an identification parade for masked assailants, and the main revision petition 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 hearing of a criminal revision petition?
- Does the failure to conduct an identification parade for masked assailants constitute a valid ground for suspending a sentence?
- Is the delay in the hearing of a main revision petition a relevant factor in granting bail to a convicted person?
- Section 392, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
' IJAZ AHMAD CHAUDHRY, J.- The petitioners vide judgment dated 26-2-2005 having been found guilty under section 392, P.P.C. Were sentenced to three years R.I. 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 P.W.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 ho 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.'
Order, accordingly. 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.