SARFRAZ and 2 others- Appellants/Petitioners vs THE STATE
This application was filed under Section 426 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, seeking the suspension of sentences awarded to petitioners Nos. 2 and 3 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Khushab. The petitioners had been sentenced to five years of imprisonment each, while their co-accused, to whom the fatal injury was attributed, was sentenced to death. The core legal question was whether the sentences of the petitioners should be suspended pending the hearing of their appeal, given that the appeal's hearing was delayed due to the pending printing of the paper book for the co-accused's Murder Reference. The Lahore High Court held that because the petitioners had been on bail during the trial, had been in custody since their conviction, and faced the risk of serving out their entire five-year sentences before the appeal could be heard, their appeal would be rendered meaningless. Consequently, the Court suspended their sentences and admitted them to bail, establishing the principle that a short sentence may be suspended where delay in the hearing of an appeal would otherwise result in the sentence being fully served before the appeal is decided.
- Can a convict's sentence be suspended under Section 426 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 if the hearing of the appeal is delayed due to a co-accused's pending Murder Reference?
- Whether a short sentence of imprisonment should be suspended if the appellant is likely to undergo the entire term before the appeal can be heard?
- Does the fact that an accused was on bail during the trial support an application for the suspension of sentence pending appeal?
- Section 426, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' Karam Elahi son of Falak Sher and Muhammad Ramzan son of Sher Muhammad, the petitioners/appellants Nos.2 and 3, who along with their co-accused, namely, Sarfraz (appellant No,1) had been convicted and sentenced to various terms of imprisonment including that of death awarded to Sarfraz appellant No,1, by filing this application under section 426, Cr. P. C . Have sought suspension of the sentences awarded to them through the impugned judgment dated 27-3-2008 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khushab.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties at considerable length and going through the impugned judgment, it has been observed that the petitioners have been sentenced to five year imprisonment each, whereas their co-accused Sarfraz, to whom fatal injury to the deceased had been attributed, had been sentenced to death. All the convicts had challenged their convictions through this appeal, the hearing whereof is not in sight in the near future because the printing of the paper book of Murder Reference to the latters' extent would take some time. The petitioners are behind the bars from the date of their conviction i.e, 27-3-2008 and had remained A on bail during the course of trial. In these circumstances, we are of the view that till such time the Murder Reference is fixed, the petitioners will have undergone whole of the sentence awarded to them, rendering their appeal to be rather meaningless.
3. For what has been discussed above, we are inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. According, by allowing this petition, we suspend the sentences awarded to them and direct that they be released from custody subject to their furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs,50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand) each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Deputy Register (Judi.) of this Court. They shall keep appearing before this Court on each and every date of hearing in future.