GHULAM QADIR vs THE STATE
This matter concerns an application filed under Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, seeking the suspension of a two-year sentence awarded to the applicant by the trial court and upheld by the appellate court. The applicant contended that there were material contradictions in the prosecution evidence, that the courts below failed to properly appreciate the record, and that the revision petition would take significant time to resolve, while the applicant had already served approximately six months in custody. The State opposed the application. The Court, upon reviewing the material on record, observed that the sentence was relatively short, the applicant had already served a portion of the sentence, and the revision petition was admitted for regular hearing, which would inevitably cause a delay in disposal. Consequently, the Court held that the suspension of the sentence was warranted in the circumstances. The application was allowed, and the applicant was ordered to be released on bail subject to furnishing surety and a personal recognizance bond to the satisfaction of the trial court.
- Can a sentence be suspended pending the disposal of a revision petition when the sentence is short and the revision will take time to resolve?
- Does the service of a portion of a sentence justify the suspension of the remaining sentence pending revision?
- Section 561-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
1. ' FARRUKH ZIA G. SHAIKH, J. Granted.
2. This application under section 561-A, Cr.P.C. Has been moved on behalf of the applicant Ghulam Qadir Phulpoto seeking suspension of the execution of sentence awarded to him by the learned Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate vide judgment dated 12-6-2008 in, Cr. Case No,132 of 2007 and maintained by the learned Sessions Judge, Khairpur vide judgment dated 12-7-2008 in Cr.Appeal No,17 of 2008 preferred by the Applicant.
2. ' Mr. Shaukat Ali Phul, learned counsel appearing for the applicant, has contended that there are material contradictions between the depositions of the complainant and mashir as well as the facts of the F.I.R.; that the Courts below have not appreciated the evidence available on record according to its prospective otherwise the applicant was entitled for acquittal; that the revision will take time for disposal and the sentence is only two years and the applicant is rioting in Jail since last about 6 months.
3. ' Mr. Agha Ather Hussain, learned Assistant Advocate- General Sindh appearing on behalf of the State has opposed the suspension of the sentence.
4. ' I have considered the arguments of learned counsel appearing for the parties and with their assistance I have also scanned the material available on record very carefully.
5. Since the sentence awarded to the applicant, is short i.e, two years only, he is in Jail for about six months, the revision is already admitted to regular hearing and it will take time for its disposal, I allow this application, suspend the sentences and order to his release on bail subject to furnishing surety in the sum of Rs,100,000 and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.