AHMAD ALI and another vs THE STATE
This matter arises from a criminal appeal where the petitioners, Ahmad Ali and Haji Muhammad, convicted under Section 302/34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 and sentenced to life imprisonment, sought suspension of their sentences and release on bail pending appeal. The core legal question concerns whether the petitioners have made out a case for suspension of sentence and post-conviction bail. The court held that while Ahmad Ali was attributed a firearm and motive, requiring a deeper appraisal of evidence not permissible at bail stage, resulting in the dismissal of his application, Haji Muhammad was unarmed and caused no injury. Consequently, the court allowed the application for Haji Muhammad, suspending his sentence and granting bail subject to sureties. The key principle laid down is that where an appellant is shown to be unarmed and attributed no injury during the occurrence, a case for suspension of sentence and grant of post-conviction bail is made out.
- Whether an unarmed appellant attributed no injury is entitled to suspension of sentence and bail pending appeal?
- Does attribution of ineffective firing and sharing of common intention warrant refusal of post-conviction bail?
- Can a deeper appraisal of evidence be undertaken at the stage of hearing a bail application after conviction?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
Through this petition, Ahmad Ali and Haji Muhammad appellants/petitioners have sought suspension of sentence and their release on bail.
2. Both the petitioners alongwith other co-accused were convicted under section 302/34 P.P.C. and were sentenced to life imprisonment with a fine of Rs 50.000 each in a case F.I.R.No,30 dated 30-10- 1996 under section 302/34 P.P.C. registered at Police Station Chowk Azam, District Layyah.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that although Ahmad Ali was armed with .12 bore gun but he had not fired at the deceased and no recovery was effected from him. In fact it was a case of exercise of right of self- defence exercised by Hafeez-ur-Rehman, co-accused. He further contended that Haji Muhammad/petitioner was un-armed and had not caused any injury to anyone. He has also no motive.
4. I have gone .through the judgment and also heard the learned counsel for the State, who has opposed the bail application. According to the prosecution case, motive is attributed to Ahmad Ali, 'who was also armed with. 12 bore gun. Ineffective firing is also attributed to him. The question whether he shared common intention or not, would need a deeper appraisal of the evidence, which is not permissible at this stage. Thus, bail application to the context of Ahmad Ali is dismissed.
5. It has been conceded that Haji Muhammad was empty-handed at the time of occurrence and he did not cause any injury to the deceased or the P.Ws.
6. In these circumstances, I am inclined to suspend the sentence of Haji Muhammad/petitioner and grant his bail subject to his tendering bail bonds in the sum of Rs,2,00,000 (Rupees two lacs) with two sureties each in the like mount to the satisfaction of the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Bench. Haji Muhammad would appear on each and every date of hearing of his appeal.