MUHAMMAD AYUB Versus STATE

ORDER

1. The appeal filed by appellant has been admitted to regular hearing. B; this application, the suspension of sentence and release of appellant on bail i, sought during the pendency of the appeal. The learned Advocate for the appellant argued that the provision of subsection (1‑A) of section 426, Cr.P.C shall not be a bar to the suspension of sentence during the pendency of appeal and that under subsection (1) of section 426 the sentence could be suspended and bail could be granted. In support of such contention the learned Advocate referred to 1991 PCr.LJ 746 AIi Asghar and another v. The State and 1990 PCr.LJ 551 Ahmed v. The State.

2. The learned AA.‑G. has opposed this application but without referring to any precedent to support his contention.

3. This application is allowed, the conviction and sentence awarded to the appellant shall remain suspended during the pendency of the appeal and he shall be released on bail on furnishing one surety in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 and P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Nazir of this Court.

4. N.H.Q./M‑1838/K Sentence suspended.