SULTAN Versus STATE

ORDER

This is an application under section 426, Cr. P. C. for suspending the execution of the sentence. The petitioner/appellant, was convicted under section 304, Part‑I, P. P. C. and sentenced to 9 years' R. I. and a fine of Rs. 5,000 in default thereof to further R. I. for 3 months.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that according to the learned trial Court the accused had acted in the exercise of the right of private defence and the question whether he exceeded or not needs serious consideration. The learned State counsel has opposed this application.

3. After hearing the learned counsel for parties I find that the learned trial Court in its judgment (para. No. 5) has held: ‑

"In the instant case I find that Sultan accused was exercising the right of private defence but he exceeded it. An accused person in the process of right of private defence is not expected to modulate his defence step by step and weight his action in golden scale. It is not possible for the accused to keep the attitude of a by‑stander. In the instant case, I find that injury No. 2 on the person of Niaz incised wound on the abdomen was grievous and dangerous to life being a stab wound and thus there was necessity for the exercise of right of private defence."

4. In view of the above observation and findings of the learned trial Court I am of the opinion that it is a fit case for the suspension of the execution of the sentence. I refrain from further discussion and expression of the opinion lest it may prejudice the merits of the case.

For what has been stated above the petitioner/appellant is allowed bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000 (Rupees twenty thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner Burewala.

S.G.D Sentence suspended