Kamran Ali alias Hannan vs The State through Prosecutor General Punjab
This criminal miscellaneous petition was filed by Kamran Ali alias Hanan seeking the suspension of his sentence and grant of bail pending his main appeal against conviction under Sections 324 and 337-D of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question was whether the petitioner's sentence should be suspended and bail granted on the ground of having undergone a major portion of his awarded sentence when the main appeal was unlikely to be heard early. The Lahore High Court allowed the petition, holding that since the petitioner had already undergone over eight years out of his ten-year sentence and contributed no delay to the hearing of his pending appeal, keeping him incarcerated would amount to serving punishment in advance. The key principle laid down is that where an accused has served a substantial portion of their substantive sentence and the timely disposal of the main appeal is remote through no fault of the appellant, the sentence ought to be suspended to prevent premature execution of punishment.
- Whether post-conviction bail can be granted when the accused has undergone a major portion of the awarded sentence?
- Does the unlikelihood of an early hearing of a pending criminal appeal justify suspending the sentence of the convict?
- Can prolonged incarceration pending appeal be construed as serving punishment in advance?
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-D, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
Crl. Misc. No. 01 of 2023.
MALIK SHAHZAD AHMAD KHAN, J. The petitioner, namely, Kamran Ali alias Hanan through the instant petition seeks grant of bail after suspension of his sentence. The petitioner along with his co-accused was tried in private complaint lodged by Asghar Ali complainant under Sections 302/324/337-D/337-F(ii)/337-F(i)/ 337-A(i)/148/149 of P.P.C. relating to Police Station Noor Kot District Narowal by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Shakargarh and vide judgment dated 29.03.2022, he was convicted and sentenced as under:-- Under Section 324 of P. P.C. to suffer 10 years R.I. along with fine of Rs.500,000/-.
Under Section 337-D of P.P.C. to suffer 10 years R.I. and Arsh (1/3rd of the Diyat) payable to Muhammad Arshad injured PW.
Both the aforementioned sentences were directed to run concurrently. The petitioner was also given the benefit of Section 382-B of Cr.P.C.
2. Arguments heard. Record perused.
3. It is evident from the perusal of the record that Kamran Ali alias Hanan petitioner has not been assigned any injury on the body of Muhammad Aslam (deceased) and he has been attributed the role of inflicting 'churri' blow on the abdomen of Muhammad Arshad (PW-2). Impugned judgment, whereby the petitioner has been convicted and sentenced as mentioned above, was passed on 29.03.2022. As per report dated 28.11.2023, submitted by the Superintendent District Jail, Narowal, the petitioner has already undergone a period of about 08 years 02 months and 06 days and the remaining portion of his sentence is 01 year 09 months and 24 days, meaning thereby that the petitioner has undergone the major portion of his sentence. Main Criminal Appeal of the petitioner has already been admitted for regular hearing vide order dated 08.11.2023. There AS no possibility of early fixation and decision of the main appeal filed by the petitioner before this Court as the same pertains to the year 2022. There is nothing on record to show that the petitioner contributed towards the delay in decision of his main appeal. Under the circumstances, of the sentence awarded to the petitioner is not suspended then there is likelihood that he may serve out his entire sentence before the decision of main case on merits. It will amount to awarding the petitioner punishment in advance. As the petitioner has already undergone the major portion of his sentence therefore, a case for suspension of his sentence and grant of bail is made out, as observed in the cases of 'Makhdoom Javed Hashmi v. The State (2008 SCMR 165), 'Adnan A. Khawaja v. The State' (2008 SCMR 1439) and 'Anwar-ul-Haq v. National Accountability Bureau' (PLD 2009 Supreme Court 388).
4. In the light of above discussion, this petition is allowed and sentence of the petitioner is suspended and he is directed to be released on hail subject to his furnishing the bail bonds in the sum of Rs.500,000/- (Rupees five hundred thousand only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court. The petitioner is, however; directed to appear before this Court on each and every future date of hearing of his main appeal till the final decision of the same.