Ramim Bibi vs State
This criminal miscellaneous petition was filed by the petitioner, Ramim Bibi, seeking the suspension of her sentence and release on bail pending the adjudication of her criminal appeal. The petitioner had been convicted under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, and sentenced to two years and six months of rigorous imprisonment. The core legal question before the Court was whether a convict serving a short sentence should be granted bail pending appeal when there is no immediate prospect of the appeal being heard. The Court held that the sentence was short and that keeping the petitioner in custody would likely result in her serving the entire sentence before the appeal could be decided, which would be impossible to rectify in the event of an acquittal. Emphasizing the principle of safe administration of justice, the Court suspended the sentence and granted bail, noting that the petitioner had not misused the concession of bail during the trial. The Court established that where a sentence is short and an early appeal hearing is unlikely, bail should generally be granted to avoid premature punishment.
- Should a convict be granted bail pending appeal if the sentence is short and unlikely to be heard before the sentence is served?
- Does the fact that a petitioner did not misuse bail during the trial influence the decision to grant bail pending appeal?
- Is it appropriate to suspend a sentence where the petitioner would likely complete the entire term of imprisonment before the appeal is decided?
- Section 9(c), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
- Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
Crl. Misc. No. 1-M of 2020 The petitioner namely Ramim Bibi wife of Atta Ullah, by way of the instant petition , has sought suspension of her sentence and release on bail during the pendency of her appeal.
2. The petitioner was tried in case FIR No. 13 of 2019, dated 18.3.2019, registere d at Police Station ANF, District Attack, in respect of an offence under Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 and vide judgment dated 9.9.2020, passed by the learned Sessions Judge/Judge Special Court, (CNS), Rawalpindi the petitioner has been convicted and sentenced as under: Rigorous imprisonment for two years and six months under Section 9(c) of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 and directed to Pay fine of Rs. 7,000/- and in default thereof to suf fer simple imprisonment for one month.
The petitioner was extended the benefit available under Section 382-B of Cr.P.C. The said main appeal is still pending adjudication, hence, the petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the sentence awarded to the petitioner is short and there is no likelihood of hearing of the appeal of the petitioner in near future. It is prayed that the sentence may be suspended.
4. On the other hand, the learned Specia l Prosecutor for ANF has opposed the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner and has prayed for hearing the Criminal Appeal No. 458 of 2020 instead of allowing the petition.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner , the learned Special Prosecutor for ANF and perused the record.
6. The remaining portion of sentence, to be undergone by the petitioner , is short. The impugned judgment was passed on 9.9.2020 and as such there are no prospects of early hearing of the same in the near future. In case, the petitioner is not released on bail during the pendency of her appeal, there is every likelihood that, before the decision of her appeal, she would have undergone her entire sentence. Furthermore, it would certainly be impossible to compensate the petitioner for her detention in jail if ultimately , she is acquitted, after having served out her entire sentence. On the contrary , in case of her release- during the pendency of her appeal, the position would be different because in the event of dismissal of her appeal by the Court, she would be arrested for serving her remaining sentence. It will amount to awarding the petitioner punishment in advance. In view of the fact that the sentence of the petitioner is very short, the question of length of sentence undergone by her has become immaterial. Furthermore, the petitioner remained on bail, during trial and there is no complaint against her that she misused the said concession in any manner . In these circumstances, coup led with the principle of safe administration of justice, it seems appropriate to order the release of the petitioner by way of suspension of her sentence. In this respect, we respectfully refer here the case of "Abdul Hameed vs. Muhammad Abdullah" (1999 SCMR 2589 ).##TE##
7. In the light of above discussion, the criminal; miscellaneous petition is allowed, the sentence of the petitioner is suspended and the petitioner namely Mst. Ramim Bibi wife of Atta Ullah, is admitted to bail subject to her furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 100,000/-(Rupees one hundred thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of the Court. The petitioner is directed to appear before the Court on each and every date of bearing of Criminal Appeal No. 458 of 2020.