MUHAMMAD BUX vs THE STATE
This application has been filed for the suspension of sentence and release of the appellant on bail on the ground of hardship, arising from a conviction under section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Sanghar. The core legal question is whether an appellant convicted of murder is entitled to suspension of sentence and release on bail on the ground of statutory or prolonged hardship when the appeal has remained pending for over five years without fault on the part of the appellant. The court held that the application for suspension of sentence should be allowed as the appeal has not proceeded for more than five years through no fault of the appellant who has remained incarcerated since January 2004. The key principle laid down is that prolonged and undue delay in the hearing of an appeal through no fault of the convicted person constitutes a sufficient ground of hardship warranting the suspension of sentence and release on bail during the pendency of the appeal.
- Whether an appellant convicted under section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 is entitled to suspension of sentence on the ground of hardship due to delayed appeal?
- Does prolonged incarceration without hearing of the appeal through no fault of the appellant constitute sufficient ground for bail?
- Can the sentence of a life convict be suspended pending appeal when the court cannot hear the matter in the near future?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
1. ORDER GHULAM SARWAR KORAI, J. This application has been filed for suspension of sentence and release of the appellant on bail on the ground of hardship.
2. Appellant was convicted by the Court of 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Sanghar, vide impugned Judgment dated 12-9-2006 for offence punishable under section 302, P.P.C. To suffer R.I. For life and to pay fine of Rs.100,000. In case of default whereof to suffer R.I. For two years more. Learned counsel for the appellant submits the appellant is behind the bars since 9-1-2004 and he has not been released even during pendency of the case. Learned counsel further submits that the Appeal was filed by the appellant on.26-9-2006 and was admitted for regular hearing on 12-10-2006 but could not be heard for want of time and there is no likelihood that the Appeal be heard in near future.
3. Mr. Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro, A.P.-G. Appearing for the State has opposed this application on the ground that the appellant is involved in murder case, therefore, he is not entitled for suspension of sentence and release on bail.
4. The Appeal has not been proceeded since last more than five years without any fault on the part of the appellant who is behind the bars since 9-1-2004, therefore, this application for suspension of sentence is allowed. The sentence awarded to the appellant is suspended and he shall be released on bail upon furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs. 300,000 (Three Hundred Thousand) each