FARZAND ALI AND ANOTHER vs The STATE
The petitioners filed a petition for leave to appeal against the dismissal of their application for suspension of sentence pending their appeal before the Lahore High Court. They had been convicted under section 302/149 of the Pakistan Penal Code and sentenced to life imprisonment. The High Court had suspended the sentences of some co-accused whose injuries were simple, but dismissed the petitioners' application on the ground that their exact role could only be determined after appreciation of evidence. The core legal question was whether the Supreme Court should interfere with the High Court's discretionary order refusing to suspend the sentences. The Supreme Court held that it would not interfere with the discretion exercised by the High Court in a matter still pending before it, while observing that the petitioners could approach the High Court again if advised. The petition was accordingly dismissed.
- Whether the Supreme Court will interfere with the discretion exercised by the High Court in refusing to suspend a sentence pending appeal?
- Can an accused whose sentence suspension was refused approach the High Court again for relief?
- Section 302/149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.-The petitioners alongwith their co-accused, have filed an appeal before the Lahore High Court against their conviction under section 302/149, P. P. C. For which they were sentenced to life imprisonment and against their conviction for other offences for which also they have been imposed various sentences. These have been ordered to run concurrently with the sentence under section 302/149, P. P. C. They also applied, along--with 8 other co-accused, for suspension of their sentence pending the final hearing of the appeal filed by them in the High Court.
2. A learned Single Judge of the High Court, by his order dated 10-6-1982, suspended the sentence of five of their accused on the ground that "the injuries attributed to them were found to be simple."
The prayer for suspension (if sentence by the petitioners, as also of four other co-accused, has, however, been dismissed on the ground that the exact part played by their --can only be determined "after appreciation, of the evidence."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners herein submits that no distinction exists between the case of the accused persons whose prayer for suspension of sentence has been accepted and that of the present petitioners. This submis--sion, prima facie, appears to be correct.
4. However, as we would not like to interfere with the discretion exercised by the High Court in a matter which is still pending before it we would, accordingly, dismiss this petition on this ground.
The petitioners may, however, if so advised, again approach the learned High Court for relief.
5. This petition, with these observations, is dismissed.