LIAQUAT and anothers vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a second application for suspension of sentence filed under Section 426, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, on behalf of a female convict appellant, Mst. Shahida alias Hameeda, who gave birth to a child while incarcerated. The primary legal question was whether the suspension of the sentence was warranted given the birth of a suckling child and the lack of adequate facilities in prison for the infant's upbringing. The Court held that the infant, being innocent, should not suffer for the mother's alleged misdeeds, and that continued incarceration would violate the child's fundamental rights to liberty. Furthermore, the Court emphasized that separating a suckling child from the mother could be detrimental to the child's physical and psychic health. Consequently, the Court suspended the execution of the sentence pending the appeal and granted bail to the appellant, subject to the furnishing of a surety bond. The judgment reinforces the principle that the welfare and fundamental rights of an innocent child must be prioritized, even in the context of a parent's criminal conviction.
- Whether the birth of a child in prison constitutes sufficient grounds for the suspension of a convict mother's sentence?
- Does the continued incarceration of a mother with a suckling child violate the child's fundamental rights?
- Can a court suspend the execution of a sentence pending appeal based on the health and welfare of a convict's infant child?
- Section 426, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Rule 27, Federal Shariat Court (Procedure) Rules 1981
- Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan
ORDER
1. ' This is an application under section 426, Cr.P.C. Read with Rule 27 of the Federal Shariat Court (Procedure) Rules, 1981 moved second time in respect of convict appellant Mst. Shahida alias Hameeda wife of Muhammad Yaqoob Umrani resident of Karma Bagh Larkana. Earlier an application of the identical nature numbering Criminal Miscellaneous No,28/K of 1998 was dismissed through an order, dated 3-9-1998. In the said order it was observed that if necessary records are brought regarding the birth of a viable child, and it is proved that there is a danger for health of child who is a suckling child, a fresh application can be moved on the basis of documents or new developments under the established principles of law.
2. ' Mst. Shahida alias Hameeda has given birth to a child on 4-10-1998 in the jail and name allotted to the baby child is Nazia. Such certificate has been produced which is signed and sealed by Superintendent Special Prison for Women, Larkana. This Certificate has been issued under No,UTP/1813 of 1998, dated 19-10-1998. Learned counsel for the appellant had already appeared before the Honorable Chief Justice of this Court at Karachi on 26-11-1998, in respect of this application. The Honorable Chief Justice ordered that this application may be placed before me at Islamabad on the request of the counsel concerned. The learned counsel has argued the conditions of the jails throughout the country are detrimental to the health of the newly born children. These jails do not contain necessary facilities for upbringing of the newly-born children in conformity with the established standards of health and child psychology in the civilized world.
3. Aayat No,15 of Surat Bani Israel of the Holy Qur'an reads in part as under:--{{ARABIC TEXT}} Meaning thereby that no one shall suffer for the misdeeds of others. The newly-born baby child is not a convicted person. Her remaining in the jail shall be negation of the fundamental rights of liberty conferred upon her from the very date of birth by the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
4. She is a suckling child. Her separation from the lap of her convicted mother might prove detrimental to her physical as well as psychic health. In view of these circumstances, I am inclined to suspend the execution of the sentence of the applicant/appellant pending appeal and grant bail in the sum of Rs,25,000 with one surety and a P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
Cited by 6 cases
- Naik Muhammad vs The State 2019 PHC 38
- NAIK MUHAMMAD Versus AHMAD YAR KHAN 2019 PCrLJ 886
- Mst. NADIA vs THE STATE 2012 P Cr. L J 599
- Mst. PARVEEN IQBAL vs THE STATE 2004 P C R L J 20
- Mst. PARVEEN IQBAL Versus THE STATE 2004 PCRLJ 20
- Mst. SITARA BIBI vs THE STATE 2003 P Cr. L J 402