JALAL DIN vs THE STATE And Another
This matter arises from a first appeal filed against the judgment dated 24-3-2011, whereby the appellant was convicted and sentenced under Section 320 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years. Along with the main appeal, the appellant filed an application under Section 426 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 seeking suspension of the operation of the impugned judgment and release on bail during the pendency of the appeal. The core legal question addressed is whether the appellant is entitled to suspension of sentence and grant of bail pending a first appeal where the sentence is of short duration and the offense is bailable. The court held that since the offense charged is bailable, the sentence awarded is short, and there is no likelihood of the appeal being heard in the near future, the application should be allowed. The key principle laid down is that execution of a sentence of short duration for a bailable offense may be suspended and bail granted pending appeal when immediate hearing of the appeal is unlikely.
- Whether execution of sentence can be suspended and bail granted under Section 426 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 pending a first appeal?
- Does the bailable nature of an offense and the unlikelihood of a speedy hearing justify suspending a conviction sentence during appeal?
- Section 320, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 426, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
1. ORDER MUHAMMAD TASNIM, J.---This being first appeal against judgment dated 24-3-2011 whereby the present appellant has been convicted and sentenced for the offence under section 320, P.P.C.
2. To undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for five years. The appeal is admitted to regular hearing. Notice.
3. Call Record and Proceedings and paper book be prepared and, thereafter, put up the matter in Court for regular hearing.
2. This is an application under section 426, Cr.P.C. Praying therein that the operation of the impugned judgment may be suspended and the present appellant may be enlarged on bail. It is contended by the learned counsel for appellant that during pendency of the. Case before the trial Court the present appellant was on bail and he had regularly attended the Court and after conviction he was taken into custody and ever since then he is in custody.
4. Since the offence for which the present appellant was charged is bailable and sentence awarded to him is also a short and there is no possibility of hearing of this appeal in near future. In the circumstances, the application is allowed. The operation of impugned judgment is suspended. The appellant is admitted on bail subject to furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.I00,000 (Rupees One Lac only) with P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Nazir of this Court..