MUHAMMAD AFZAL and others vs The STATE and others
This matter concerns a petition for the suspension of sentence filed by Muhammad Hayat and Bashir Ahmad, who were convicted under Sections 302(b)/34 and 337-F(i) of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Kabirwala. The petitioners were sentenced to life imprisonment and other penalties following a remanded trial. The core legal question was whether the petitioners were entitled to the suspension of their sentences and release on bail pending the final adjudication of their criminal appeal. The Court observed that the petitioners had already served approximately 12 years of their sentence and noted that their co-accused, who faced a death sentence, had been convicted separately. Furthermore, the prosecution failed to demonstrate any prior criminal involvement of the petitioners. Consequently, the Court held that continued incarceration would serve no useful purpose. The Court granted the petition, suspending the sentences and ordering the release of the petitioners on bail, subject to the furnishing of bail bonds, emphasizing the lack of likelihood of an early conclusion to the main appeal.
- Does the long duration of time already served in custody constitute a valid ground for the suspension of sentence pending appeal?
- Can a sentence be suspended if the prosecution fails to show any prior criminal involvement of the accused?
- Is the lack of likelihood of an early conclusion of the main appeal a relevant factor for granting bail to a convict?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 302(b), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-A(ii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(i), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 544-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
C.M. No.1 of 2013 ' Petitioners Muhammad Hayat and Bashir Ahmad through the instant petition have sought suspension of their sentence awarded to them by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Kabirwala, District Khanewal in case FIR No.203/2004, dated 22-5-2009, under Sections 302, 337-A(ii), 337- F(i)/34, P.P.C. Registered at Police Station Saddar Kabirwala and vide judgment dated 21-10-2013 they were convicted under Section 302(b)/34, P.P.C. To imprisonment for life each with a fine of Rs.50,000 each as compensation under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. To be paid to the legal heirs of the deceased, in default of which to further undergo three months S.I. Each. They were further convicted under Section 337-F(i), P.P.C. And sentenced to one year R.I. Each with daman of Rs.10,000 to be paid to injured Mureed Abbas, in default thereof they would be kept in jail till the realization of the same. Benefit of Section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Was, however, extended to them.
2. Arguments heard. Record perused.
3. Perusal of the file reveals that previously the petitioners along with their co-accused, Afzal were convicted and sentenced vide judgment dated 30-4-2007. All the convicts preferred Crl.A. No.200 of 2007 before this Court and this Court vide order dated 10-9-2013 remanded the case back to the learned trial court to re-write the judgment separately in the private criminal complaint and the FIR case. Now the accused have been convicted and sentenced through judgment dated 21-10-2013 by the learned trial court and they have preferred Criminal Appeal No.448 of 2013. During the pendency of the appeal, the petitioners have preferred instant petition for suspension of their sentence on the ground' that previously when the Crl. A. No.200 of 2007 was pending they were on bail and thereafter they were arrested on 14/15-6-2007 and they have served out about 12 years of their sentence. Their co-accused, Muhammad Afzal to whom the role of firing at the deceased was attributed has been convicted and sentenced to death, therefore, there is no likelihood of early conclusion of the main appeal in near future. Learned D.P.G. As well as the learned counsel for the complainant could not point out any material against the petitioners which shows that they are previously involved in such like cases. In these circumstances, further captivity of the petitioners in jail will not serve any useful purpose to the prosecution and they are entitled to be released on bail by suspending their sentence.
5. Resultantly, we accept the instant petition and suspend the sentence of the petitioners subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.200,000 (Rupees two lac only) each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Deputy Registrar (Judl) of this Court. They are directed to appear before this Court on each and every date of hearing till the final disposal of the main appeal.