Rashid etc vs State etc

ORDER

Crl. Misc. No. 01/2018 Through this petition under Section 426, Cr.P.C. Muhammad Rashid, Tayyab Ahmad and Muhammad Shehzad petitioners, seek release on bail by way of suspension of their sentence awarded to them by the learned Additional Session Judge/Judge Juvenile Court, Multan, vide judgment dated 26.11.2018, in case F.I.R. No. 310 dated 02.06.2017 registered under Section 302, PPC at Police Station Makhdoom Rasheed, District Multan, whereby they were convicted and sentenced as under:

1. Muhammad Moavia alias Moaz alias Asmat Ullah(This accused has been tried separately being adult and was convicted by the learned trial Court through a separately judgment and his Criminal Appeal No. 175 of 2015 has been dismissed by this Court today i.e. 17.04.2017)

2. Abdullah alias Muhammad alias Masab(appellant tried being juvenile)

Benefit of Section 382-B, Cr .P.C. was also extended to the petitioner .

2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties as well as the learned Deputy Prosecutor General and gone through the impugned judgment. It evinces from record that the petitioners were convicted and sentence as mentioned above. The main appeal was filed in the year 2018 and till now the same is awaiting decision despite lapse of more than two years, hence the petitioners are entitled for the concession of bail on statutory ground as more than two years and four months have passed but his appeal has not been decided without any fault on their part.

3. Even otherwise it has been observed that the petitioners also enjoyed the premium of bail during the course of trial. There is no second cavil to this proposition that the appeal is continuation of trial. Guidance in this regard is sought from the dictums of law laid down by the august Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Raja Shamshad Hussain vs. Gulraiz Akhtar etc. and The State through Advocate-General, Punjab Lahore (PLJ) 2007 SC 564) wherein it has been held that: "----Ss. 426(1) & 497--Suspension of sentence and grant of bail-Principles--Provisions under S.426(1), Cr.P.C. are analogous to the one contained in S.497, of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898., in both the cases the sentence or detention is to be suspended pending hearing of appeal trial and the convict or the detenue is to be released on bail with only difference that in the former case the person is a convict who has been already found guilty while in the latter case he has been charged only to face trial and is still to be proved guilty --In absence of any guideline, it would be appropriate to follow the one provided under S.497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 on the principle that where a statue lays down certain principles for doing some acts they may be taken as a guideline for doing something of the same nature which is in the discretion of the Court--Existence and non-existence of reasonable grounds for 'believing that person is guilty of the offence and the scop e of further inquiry in support of 497, Cr.P.C. are the criterial hall marks and for arriving at such conclusion tentati ve assessment has been made permissible--In case of suspension of sentence, only tentative assessment of available evidence and of judgment is permissible and detailed appraisal of evidence is to be avoided."

4. For the discussion supra, this petition is accepted and the sentence of the petitioners Muhammad Rashid, Tayyab Ahmad and Muhammad Shehzad, is suspended subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.

2,00,000/- (rupees two lacs) each with one surety each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of Deputy Registrar (Judi.) of this Court. The petitioners are directed to appear before this Court on each and every date of hearing of their main appeal.