Sajid alias Saji vs State, etc.
The matter arises from a criminal miscellaneous application filed in a pending criminal appeal, whereby the petitioner, convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 and sentenced to imprisonment for life by the trial court, sought suspension of his sentence and release on bail on the statutory ground of delay in the decision of his appeal. The core legal question is whether a convict whose appeal against life imprisonment has remained undecided for more than two years without any fault on their part is entitled to bail as a statutory right under the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The court held that the petitioner has earned an indefeasible statutory right to be released on bail under proviso (c) of Section 426(1A) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, as the appeal has been pending for over four years without the appellant's fault. The key principle laid down is that an appellate court is legally mandated to release a convicted person on bail if their appeal against life imprisonment is not decided within the statutory period, unless reasons are recorded to direct otherwise.
- Whether a convict sentenced to life imprisonment is entitled to bail as a statutory right if their appeal is not decided within two years?
- Does the pendency of an appeal for more than four years without the appellant's fault constitute sufficient ground for suspension of sentence under Section 426 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 426(1A)(c), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
Crl. Misc. No. 01/2022.
The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gujranwala, vide his judgment dated 28.09.2018, awarded imprisonment for life to the petitioner-Sajid alias Saji, under Section 302 read with Section 34, P.P.C. in a private complaint, which is under challenge through the accompanying appeal, who, through the instant petition, has sought suspension of his sentence and admitting him to bail till disposal of the main appeal, on statutory ground of delay in decision of appeal pending for a period of more than four and half years, as submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner, which is not negated by the learned counsel representing the complainant.
2. Admitted position is that appellant's appeal against conviction is pending in the Court for the last more than four years, without any fault on his part, whereas proviso (c) of Section 426(1A), Cr.P.C. stipulates release of those convicts whose appeals could not be heard according to the parameter given in it declaring it statutory right of the convict to claim his bail if he had already served such period, i.e., "426(1A)
(c) to imprisonment for life or imprisonment exceeding seven years and whose appeal has not been decided within a period of two years of his conviction:"
In support, reliance is placed on Shahbaz v. The State' (1992 SCMR 1903), wherein it has been held, "A perusal of the above sub-section (1-A) with its clause (c) indicates that an, appellate Court is required to release convicted person on bail if he has been awarded imprisonment for life or imprisonment exceeding seven years and his appeal has not been decided within a period of two years of his conviction unless, the appellate Court for the reasons to be recorded directs otherwise."
Same view had been taken in the case law cited in 'Muhammad Yaqoob and others v. The state'
(1991 SCMR 1459). 'Ghulam Murtaza v. State, etc.' (PLJ 2022 SC (Cr.C.) 78), 'Safeer Ullah @ Sagheer Jugnu v. State and another' (PLJ 2018 SC 450), Makhdoom Javed Hashmi v. The State'
(2008 SCMR 165), Rana Muhammad Ashiq and 6 others v. The State' (1996 SCMR 1559), Liaqat and another v. The State' (1995 SCMR 1819) and 'Altaf Hussain Shah v. The State' (1994 SCMR 480) are also referred.
3. In view of the above it is held that during pendency of his appeal, the applicant has earned a statutory right to be released on bail in terms of proviso (c) of Section 426(1A), Cr.P.C. In this view of the matter, I am inclined to accept this application, in consequence whereof, the operation of the impugned judgment is suspended, and the applicant is directed to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/-(Rupees one lac only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court.