FAYYAZ HUSSAIN vs STATE
This criminal petition arises from the conviction of the petitioner, Fayyaz Hussain, under Sections 302/34 and 452 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, for which he was sentenced to life imprisonment and additional terms. The petitioner sought suspension of his sentence pending the appeal. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to the suspension of his sentence given the alleged discrepancies between the ocular account and the medical evidence. The Lahore High Court observed a material conflict between the prosecution's ocular version, which attributed the use of a blunt weapon (iron rod) to the petitioner, and the medical evidence, which indicated the injury caused by a sharp-edged weapon. Furthermore, the trial court had noted that the injury attributed to the petitioner was not fatal. Considering these discrepancies and the fact that the appeal was unlikely to be heard in the near future, the Court held that the petitioner was entitled to relief. Consequently, the Court allowed the petition and suspended the sentence, subject to the petitioner furnishing bail bonds.
- Does a material conflict between medical evidence and the ocular version of an occurrence constitute grounds for the suspension of a sentence?
- Is the suspension of a sentence permissible when the main appeal is unlikely to be heard in the near future?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 452, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 544-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
The petitioner Fiaz Hussain was convicted under Sections 302/34 PPC by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Muzaffargarh, vide his judgment dated 2.6.2006. He was sentenced to life imprisonment. He was also convicted under Section 452 PPC and sentenced to two years' R.I. with a fine of Rs, 10,000/- and in default thereof to undergo SI for two months. He was also directed to pay compensation of Rs, 50,000/- to the legal heirs of the deceased under -Section 544-A, Cr.P.C. and in default thereof to undergo SI for six months. Through this petition, the petitioner has prayed for the suspension of his sentence.
2.Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that according to the medical evidence, the injury attributed to the petitioner was caused by sharp edged weapon, whereas, the petitioner was allegedly armed with blunt weapon i,e, iron rod at the time of occurrence; that there is a conflict between medical evidence and the ocular version; that the injury attributed to the petitioner is simple in nature and that the petitioner is in jail since 26.1.06.
3.On the other hand, learned counsel for the state has vehemently opposed the suspension of sentence and submits that specific role is attributed to the petitioner; that the petitioner had caused injury to the deceased on a vital part of his body; that recovery of iron rod was effected from the petitioner and that during investigation, the petitioner was found guilty.
4.Arguments heard. Record perused.
5. The petitioner was allegedly armed with an iron rod at the time of occurrence but injury attributed to him i,e, Injury No, 2 is sharp edged weapon which clearly shows Inaba fide on the part of the prosecution. There is material conflict between medical evidence and ocular account of occurrence: Moreover, learned trial Court has itself held that injury attributed to the petitioner was not fatal. The appeal relates to year 2006 and there is no likelihood of hearing of the main appeal in the near future.
6. For the foregoing reasons, we allow this petition and sentence .awarded to Fayyaz Hussain petitioner is hereby suspended subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs, 100,000/- (rupees one lac only) with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of Deputy Registrar (Judl.) of this Court.