Muhammad Ayoub vs Ld. 8th ADJ Hyd & Others
This matter concerns an application for suspension of sentence and release on bail pending the disposal of an appeal against a conviction under Section 3(i) and (ii) of the Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005. The applicant, who had been sentenced to five years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine, sought bail on the grounds that the sentence was relatively short, he had already been in custody for three months, and the appeal was unlikely to be heard promptly due to heavy court pendency. The State offered no objection to the request, while the complainant opposed it. The Court observed that the applicant had enjoyed the concession of bail throughout the trial and that the appeal process would inevitably take time. Consequently, the Court held that a case for suspension of sentence was made out. Relying on established precedent, the Court suspended the operation of the impugned judgment and admitted the applicant to bail, subject to the furnishing of surety and a personal recognizance bond.
- Can a convict be released on bail pending the disposal of an appeal if the sentence is relatively short?
- Does the heavy pendency of cases in the appellate court constitute a valid ground for suspending a sentence under Section 426 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Section 3(i), Illegal Dispossession Act 2005
- Section 3(ii), Illegal Dispossession Act 2005
- Section 426, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
The applicant for an offence punishable under section 3 (i) & (ii) of Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005 has been convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I for five years and to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- to the complainant by learned VIIIth Additional Sessions Judge, Hyderabad vide his Judgment dated 27.04.2021, which is impugned by the applicant before this Court by preferring an appeal and in the meanwhile, by way of listed application under section 426 Cr.P.C., has sought for his release on bail pending disposal of his appeal.
2. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the sentence is short one, the applicant is in custody since three months and hearing of his appeal is likely to take time. By contending so, he sought for release of the applicant on bail pending disposal of his appeal.
3. Learned A.P.G for the State has recorded no objection to release of the applicant on bail while learned counsel for the complainant party has recorded objection to release of the applicant on bail by contending that disposal of appeal of the applicant would not take much time.
4. I have considered the above arguments and perused the record.
5. The applicant has been convicted in a direct complaint; at trial he was enjoy ing the concession of bail, the conviction which is awarded to the applicant is short one and hearing of his appeal because of heavy pendency , obviously would take some time. In these circumstances; a case for release of the applicant on bail pending disposal of his appeal obviously is made out.
6. In view of above, by suspending the operation of impugned judgment and while relying upon case of Abdul Hameed Vs. Muhammad Abdullah and others (1999 SCMR 2589 ) the applicant is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing surety in sum of Rs. 50,000/- and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of Additional Registrar of this Court.
7. The listed application M.A. No.3364 of 2021 is disposed of accordingly .