Muhammad Sharif And Other vs The State
This matter arises from a criminal petition seeking the suspension of sentence and grant of bail on medical grounds by a petitioner convicted of capital offences. The core legal question is whether a convict sentenced to death for heinous crimes can have their sentence suspended and be released on bail due to deteriorating health and severe medical conditions. The Lahore High Court held that notwithstanding the gravity of the offences and the death sentence imposed, where a convict suffers from debilitating medical conditions such as paraplegia and bedsores that cannot be properly treated within jail facilities, the sentence may be suspended and bail granted to enable treatment by doctors or at a hospital of the convict's choice. The key principle laid down is that the constitutional right to life and medical treatment overrides the general bar against suspending sentences in heinous cases under exceptional circumstances involving critical illness.
- Can a sentence of death be suspended on medical grounds?
- Whether bail can be granted to a convict suffering from a critical illness notwithstanding a conviction for a heinous offence?
- Does a condemned prisoner have the right to get treatment from a hospital or doctor of their choice when jail facilities are inadequate?
- Section 302(b), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 7(a), Anti-Terrorism Act 1997
- Section 544-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER Petitioner Muhammad Bakhsh seeks suspension of his sentence awarded to him with judgment dated 30.5.2007 passed by the learned Special Judge, Anti-Terrorism Court- II, Multan, whereby, he was convicted under Section 302(b), PPC and sentenced to death and under Section 7(a) of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 to death with a fine of Rs. 2,00, 000/- on each count in default whereof to further undergo five months' S.I. Under Section 544-A, Cr.P.C, a compensation of Rs.
2,00,000/- on each four counts was awarded to him and in default whereof to further undergo S.I.
For months on four counts each.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that although the petitioner is a condemned prisoner but he is on the death bed; that his health is deteriorating day by day; that he has bedsores on different parts of his body and that in. The peculiar facts and circumstances of the case petitioner is entitled to bail after suspension of his sentence on medical ground.
3. On the other hand, the learned DPG contends that the petitioner has been convicted to death in a heinous offence and that it is not a case for suspension of sentence awarded to the petitioner by the learned Trial Court through a well-reasoned judgment based on evidence.
4. Heard. We have noted that the petitioner has been awarded death sentence on more than one counts by the learned Special Court constituted under the Anti- Terrorism Act, 1997 but simultaneously we have gone through the report of Medical Officer dated 22.7.2009, New Central Jail, Multan according to which the petitioner is a case of transverse militias i.e. Patient of paraplegia and bedsores on different parts of his body, so, in our view his treatment would not be possible within the jail hospital and he has a right to get him treated from the doctor/hospital of his choice. We have further noted that the petitioner was sentenced to death but the instances are not lacking when the sentence of death is suspended by the apex Court, In this regard reliance is placed on Peer Mukaramul Haq Vs. National Accountability Bureau (NAB) through Chairman and others (2006 SCM R 1225), wherein, at page 1228, the apex Court of Pakistan observed as under:-- We are conscious of the fact that in heinous offence where sentence of life imprisonment or 14 years has been awarded the question of suspension of sentence does not arise subject to certain exceptions but it must not be lost sight of that in proper case even the bail can be granted where the sentence of death or life imprisonment has been awarded. If any reference is needed the following authorities can be referred:- The State Vs. Shehswa r (1969 SCM R 151); Bahar Khan Vs. The State (1969 SCM R 81); Abdullah Khan Vs. Karamdad Khan (1968 SCM R 1064); Maqsood Vs. Ali Muhammad (1971 SCM R 657); Abdul Ghafoor Vs. Anwarul Hassan (1979 SCMR 149); Faqir Muhammad Vs. Akbar {"[979 SCMR 270); Haji Mir Aftab Vs. The State (1979 SCM R 320); Muhammad Ashraf Vs. State (1971 SCM R 183); Noor Abdullah Vs. State (1981 SCM R 859); Jamshed Azam Vs. State (1990 SCM R 1393); Khalid Saigol Vs. State (PLD 1962 SC 495); Abdur Rashid Vs. The State (1988 SCM R 149); Muhammad Khurshid vs. Wazirzada (1986 SCM R 181); Nawab Khan Vs. State (1987 SCM R 272)."
In view of the above, this petition is allowed and the conviction and sentence awarded to the petitioner vide the impugned judgment of conviction is suspended subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. One lac with two sureties each in the like to the satisfaction of the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court. However, it is made clear that the petitioner shall continue appearing before this Court on each and every date of hearing till the final disposal of the appeal.