MAHMOOD KHAN And Another vs THE STATE
This matter arises from a criminal miscellaneous application seeking the suspension of sentence and grant of bail pending appeal filed by Raja Muhammad Saddique, who was convicted under sections 302(b), 324, 147, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 and section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act 1997, and sentenced to imprisonment for life. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to suspension of sentence and bail on the grounds of statutory delay in the disposal of the appeal, un-matched weapon recovery, absence of a specific role, and the rule of consistency vis-a-vis a co-convict. The court held that the petitioner made out a case for suspension of sentence under section 426 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, noting that a co-convict with a similar role had already been granted bail, the recovery was un-matched, no specific injury was attributed to the petitioner, and he had been incarcerated for over six years without a likelihood of the main appeal being heard early. The key principle laid down is that the rule of consistency applies in granting bail after conviction when a co-accused with a similar role has been accorded that concession, coupled with prolonged incarceration and delayed hearing of the appeal.
- Whether a convict is entitled to suspension of sentence on the principle of consistency when a co-accused with a similar role has been granted bail?
- Does prolonged incarceration coupled with no likelihood of an early hearing of the main appeal constitute sufficient ground for suspending a life sentence under the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Can un-matched weapon recovery and lack of a specific injury role justify the suspension of sentence pending appeal?
- Section 302(b), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 147, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 7, Anti-Terrorism Act 1997
- Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 426, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER Criminal Miscellaneous No. 432-M of 2010. Through this C.M., Raja Muhammad Saddique/petitioner seeks suspension of sentence awarded to him by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Rawalpindi vide his judgment dated 24-11-2009 in case F.I.R. No. 243 dated 14-11- 2004 under sections 302/324/ 147/149, P.P.C. And 7 ATA registered at Police Station Kalar Syedan District Rawalpindi.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner has been convicted under section 302(b), P.P.C., and sentenced to imprisonment for life. He was also directed to pay compensation of Rs.1,00,000 to the legal heirs of the deceased persons. In default of payment, he was to further undergo 3 months' S.I. With benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C.
3. It is contended that the petitioner has not been assigned any specific role of causing injury to the deceased or the injured P.Ws. Although recovery of .12 bore Carbine has been affected from the petitioner yet it is without matching. Co-convict Abdul Majeed with similar role has already been admitted to bail by this Bench vide order dated 15-6-2010. The petitioner is behind the bar for the last more than six years and there is no chance of early fixation of main appeal for hearing before this Court. It is, therefore, prayed that the sentence awarded to the petitioner may be suspended and he be released on bail.
4. On the other hand, learned D.P.-G. For the State assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant opposed the C.M.
5. Arguments heard. Record perused.
6. Admittedly co-convict Abdul Majeed with similar role of indiscriminate firing upon the injured P.Ws. Has been admitted to bail by this Bench vide order dated 15-6-2010. This being so, the petitioner has also become entitled to the concession of bail on the principle of rule of consistency.
The petitioner has not been assigned any specific role of causing injury to the deceased. Although recovery of .12 bore Carbine has been effected fromThe petitioner yet it is without matching. The petitioner is behind the bar for the last more than six years and there is no chance of early fixation of main appeal for hearing before this Court. We, therefore, allow this application under section 426, Cr.P.C. And suspend the sentence of Muhammad Saddique/petitioner subject to furnishing of bail bonds in the sum of Rs.2,00,000 (Rupees two lac) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court.
The petitioner is directed to appear before this Court on each and every date of hearing till the final disposal of main appeal.