Talal Korejo vs The State
This criminal appeal challenges the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court, wherein the appellant was found guilty of possessing 140 grams of Charas and sentenced to one year and three months of rigorous imprisonment under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. Pending the final adjudication of the appeal, the appellant filed an application seeking the suspension of his sentence and release on bail. The core legal question before the Court was whether, given the relatively short duration of the sentence and the fact that the appellant remained on bail throughout the trial, the sentence should be suspended during the pendency of the appeal. The Court, upon considering the arguments and the record, held that the sentence should be suspended. Consequently, the Court admitted the appellant to bail, subject to the furnishing of surety and a personal recognizance bond. The decision reinforces the principle that where a sentence is short and the appeal is unlikely to be heard immediately, the appellate court may exercise its discretion to suspend the sentence and grant bail to the convict, provided the appellant was on bail during the trial.
- Can a sentence be suspended pending the hearing of a criminal appeal if the sentence awarded is short?
- Is the fact that an appellant remained on bail during the trial a relevant factor for granting bail pending appeal?
- Section 9(b), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
ORDER
1. The appellant for being in possession of 140 grams of Charas has been convicted and sentenced under section 9
(b) of CNS Act, 1997, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and three months with fine of rupees nine thousand and in default whereof, to undergo simple imprisonment for three months, by learned 1 Additional Sessions/Special Judge (N)/MCTC, Dadu, vide judgment dated 10.11.2021, which has been impugned by the appellant before this Court by preferring the instant criminal appeal and in the meanwhile, he has sought for suspension of his sentence for the reason that the sentence is short; the appellant was on bail at trial and hearing of his appeal is likely to take time, which is opposed by learned D.P .G for the State.
2. We have considered the above arguments and perused the record.
3. In view of above while relying upon case of Abdul Hameed Vs. Muhammad Abdullah & others (1999 SCMR- 2589 ), the sentence awarded to the appellant is suspended, consequently , he is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing surety in sum of Rs.30,000/- and P.R bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of Additional Registrar of this Court.
4. The listed application (M.A.No. 7433/2021) is disposed of accordingly .
5. Adjourned to date in of fice for hearing of main appeal.