MUHAMMAD ASLAM vs STATE, etc
The petitioner filed a criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 426 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 seeking suspension of his sentence of imprisonment for life awarded under Section 460 and Section 302/34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, pending the disposal of his criminal appeal. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to the suspension of his sentence and release on bail on the statutory ground of delay in the adjudication of his appeal beyond two years from his conviction. The Lahore High Court held that since the petitioner's appeal had been pending for more than two years without any contributory delay on his part, and he was not classified as a hardened, desperate, or dangerous criminal, he satisfied the statutory requirements for relief under Section 426, Cr.P.C. The court laid down the principle that an appellant serving a sentence exceeding seven years or life imprisonment is entitled to suspension of sentence and bail as a statutory right if their appeal is not decided within two years, barring any delay occasioned by the appellant.
- Is a convict entitled to suspension of sentence and bail under Section 426 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 on the ground of statutory delay if the appeal is not decided within two years of conviction?
- Does the pendency of an appeal for more than two years without fault of the appellant warrant the suspension of sentence under Section 426, Cr.P.C.?
- Can a person convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment be granted bail pending appeal when the delay in deciding the appeal is not occasioned by the appellant?
- Section 426, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 460, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 302/34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 544-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
Crl. Misc. No, 1 of 2012 Muhammad Aslam petitioner has filed this petition under Section 426, Cr.P.C. seeking suspension of his sentence awarded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sahiwal vide judgment dated 21.12.2010. The petitioner was convicted for the commission of offence of lurking house-trespass and also committing the murder of Aftab Ahmad Khan and was sentenced to imprisonment for life under Section 460, PPC and Section 302/34, PPC and to pay the compensation of Rs, 50,000/- under Section 544-A, Cr.P.C. recoverable as arrears of land revenue and in case of default, to further undergo imprisonment for six months. He was held entitled to the benefit of Section 382-B, Cr.P.C.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner is behind the bar since his arrested on 9.6.2009. He was convicted in this case on 21.12.2010 and he filed this on 19.1.2011 and since then his appeal is pending and there is no likelihood of the hearing of appeal in near future, therefore, he is entitled to the suspension of sentence under Section 426, Cr.P.C. on statutory ground. Relies on case titled "Waseem vs. The State (2012 YLR [Lahore] 1013". "Insaaf and 2 others vs. The State (2012 YLR [Sindh] 1588" AND "Pervaiz and 2 others vs. The State (2010 YLR 1397 [Lahore]".
3. On the other hand, learned DPG for the State has opposed this petition and has contended that the petitioner has committed heinous offence of murder of an innocent person, therefore, the he is not entitled to the suspension of his sentences. Relies on case titled "Shahid vs. The State (2008 SCM R 1599 [Supreme Court of Pakistani])" AND "Babar Ali vs. Bashir Ahmad and another (2007 SCM R 184 ["Supreme Court of Pakistan])".
4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned DPG for the State and have perused the record.
5. The petitioner was arrested in this case on 9.6.2009 convicted in this case on 21.12.2010 and since he is behind the bars. He preferred appeal against the said judgment on 19.1.2011, which is still pending. He made this petition under Section 426, Cr.P.C. on the ground of statutory delay in the disposal of the appeal. The case law produced by learned DPG for the State is not directly applicable to the facts and circumstances of this case.
6. The appellate Court under Section 426, Cr.P.C. shall, except where it is of the opinion that delay in the decision of appeal has been occasioned by an act or omission of the appellant or any other person acting on his behalf, order a convicted person to be released on bail, who has been sentenced to imprisonment for life or imprisonment exceeding seven years and whose appeal has not been decided within a period of two years of his conviction.
7. The appeal of present petitioner is pending for last more than two years and there is no likelihood of hearing of appeal in near future. Furthermore, there is no evidence on record against the petitioner that, he was previously convicted, hardened, desperate or dangerous criminal or was accused of an act of terrorism punishable with death or imprisonment for life, therefore, he is entitled to the suspension of sentence under Section 426, Cr.P.C. on the statutory ground.
For the foregoing reasons, the petition in hand is allowed and the impugned judgment dated 21.12.2010 stands suspended to the extent of sentence awarded to the present petitioner until the final disposal of this appeal. In the meanwhile, he is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs, 200,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Deputy Registrar (J) of this Court.