Muhammad Shabbir vs State and another
This criminal petition concerns an application for the suspension of sentence filed by the petitioner, Muhammad Shabbir, who was convicted under Section 302(c) of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 and sentenced to ten years rigorous imprisonment following his trial for murder and other offences. The core legal question was whether the petitioner, who had previously absconded during the trial proceedings, was entitled to the suspension of his sentence pending the final adjudication of his appeal. The Lahore High Court held that the petition for suspension of sentence should be dismissed. The Court reasoned that while bail should not be withheld merely as a punitive measure for previous abscondence, a fugitive from law forfeits certain procedural rights. Consequently, the Court emphasized that in cases where an accused has absconded and hampered the trial process, the discretion to grant suspension of sentence must be exercised with extreme caution and circumspection. Finding that the petitioner's conduct during the trial and the nature of the evidence presented did not warrant relief, the Court denied the application.
- Does an accused who absconded during trial lose certain procedural rights regarding the suspension of sentence?
- Should the court grant suspension of sentence liberally to an accused who was previously a proclaimed offender?
- Are the principles regulating the release of an accused on bail after suspension of conviction and sentence similar to those for bail pending trial?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 334, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-U, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-A(ii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(iii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-L(ii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 379, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 302(c), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 544-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
Muhammad Shabbir , petitioner/accused alongwith others was booked in case F.I.R. No. 114 dated 9.4.2012 under Sections 302/324/ 334/337-U/337-A(ii)/337-F(iii)/337-L(ii)/379/148/149, P.P.C. registered at Police Station Thingi of Distt. Vehari. The petitioner absconded during trial and was as such declared proclaimed offender and his matter was separated by the learned trial Court from the other co-accused persons who were tried and trial to their extent reached its logical conclusion. At some later stage the petitioner was also arrested and trial commenced which culminated into his conviction under Section 302(c), P.P.C. as a result of which he was sentenced to suffer ten years R.I. He was also directed to pay Rs.2,00,000/- compensation to legal heirs of the deceased under Section 544-A, Cr.P.C. or to suffer six months S.I. Benefit of Section 382-B, Cr.P.C. was, however , extended to him. Feeling aggrieved of the said conviction and sentence, the petitioner has filed titled appeal.
2. Through this application the petitioner seeks suspension of his sentence till the decision of main appeal.
3. Principles regulating release of an accused on bail after suspension of conviction and sentence are akin to that of concession of bail pending trial. I am also conscious that bail should not be withheld as punishment simply because the accused had absconded but at the same time I am cognizant that a fugitive from law loses some of his normal rights available to him in procedural and substantive law and in such circumstances bail should not be granted liberally rather Court should be cautious and take strict view and proceed with greater degree of circumspection. The impugned judgmen t shows that prosecution version set up in the F.I.R. and established through the P.Ws. at trial was that on 8.2.2012 at about 6.00 p.m. the petitioner armed with .12 bore gun alongwith other co-accused also armed with different weapons had attacked on Laeeq Masood, Muhammad Asif and Babar Ali of the complainant party . It was alleged that Laeeq Ahmad was be laboured by the co-accused and when Asif and Babar Ali tried to rescue him, the petitioner caused a butt blow of his gun landing on back side of head of Muhammad Asif who fell down and became unconscious. The said Asif, could not survive and expired due to said injury on 10.4.2012. During investigation .12 bore gun was recovered from him and he was found involved in the commission of crime. During trial, he remained absconder for a long period and as such tried to hamper the trial as a consequence whereof his case was separated. In these circumstances do not find it a fit case for suspension of sentence.
4. Consequently , this petition fails and is hereby dismissed.