ABDUL GHAFOOR vs THE STATE
This matter arises from a petition filed by Abdul Ghafoor against the order of the High Court dismissing his application for suspension of sentence under section 426 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The petitioner had been convicted under section 302 read with section 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 and sentenced to imprisonment for life with a fine. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the High Court erred in refusing to suspend the petitioner's sentence pending his regular appeal. The Supreme Court held that the High Court provided cogent reasons for dismissing the bail application and appropriately granted liberty to the petitioner to renew his application after the summer vacation if his appeal remained pending. The petition was accordingly dismissed based on these observations, upholding the discretionary order of the High Court.
- Whether the High Court's refusal to suspend a sentence under section 426 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 warrants interference by the Supreme Court?
- Can a convicted person file a subsequent application for suspension of sentence after the expiration of a specified period if the appeal is not fixed for hearing?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 426, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.-Abdul Ghafoor petitioner was convicted under section 302/34, P. P. C. And sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs, 3,000. He filed an appeal before the High Court against his conviction which was admitted to a regular hearing. Alongwith it he also applied for suspension of his sentence, under section 426, Cr. P. C. Which was dismissed vide the impugned order, dated 30-4-1983.
2. Hence the present petition.
3. We notice that while dismissing petitioner's application for suspension of sentence the learned Bench of the High Court has observed that: ' we do not allow the application, but permit the petitioner to move another (application) after summer vacation in case the appeal is not fixed till then."
4. We feel that the High Court has given cogent reasons for dismissing petitioner's bail application.
It has also provided him with another opportunity for moving the High Court again in case his appeal is not fixed for hearing (before the High Court) within the time specified by it. We feel that the petitioner should avail of opportunity given to him by the learned Division Bench of the High Court.
' With this observation the present petition is dismissed. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.