FAZAL MUHAMMAD and another vs THE STATE
This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the order of the Lahore High Court, which dismissed the petitioners' application for suspension of their sentence of seven years' rigorous imprisonment and fine awarded under sections 419, 420, 468, and 471 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question concerns whether the High Court erred in refusing to suspend the sentence pending appeal, given that civil court judgments allegedly exonerated the petitioners and that the conviction was purportedly based on mala fide evidence. The Supreme Court held that the arguments raised by the petitioners go to the root of the case and require detailed appreciation of evidence by the High Court at the final hearing of the appeal, and thus no illegality was committed by the High Court in dismissing the suspension application. The petition was accordingly dismissed and leave to appeal declined, with an observation that the High Court should dispose of the main appeal expeditiously.
- Whether the High Court commits any illegality in dismissing an application for suspension of sentence when the contentions raised go to the root of the case and require detailed appreciation of evidence?
- Can a criminal conviction be assailed at the bail or sentence-suspension stage based on prior civil court judgments?
- Is leave to appeal warranted against an interlocutory order refusing the suspension of a sentence where the main appeal is pending before the High Court?
- Section 419, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 420, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 468, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 471, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
1. 'TANVIR AHMED KHAN, J.---Leave to appeal is sought against the order, dated 21-12-2001 passed by a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, whereby Criminal Miscellaneous No,2 of 2001 for the suspension of sentence of 7 years' R.I. And a fine of Rs,5,000 and in default to suffer two months' S.I. Recorded against the petitioners by the learned Magistrate Section 30, Kallur Kot, emanated out of. F.I.R. No,74 of 1995, dated 2-9-1995 under sections 419/420/468/471, P.P.C.
2. Registered with Police Station Jandanwala, District Bhakkar, was dismissed.
3. ' Learned counsel has argued that the impugned conviction recorded against the petitioner by the learned Magistrate Section 30, Kallur Kot, is totally ultra wires and is based on inimical and mala fide evidence. He has further argued that a criminal case could not even have been registered in the presence of final and conclusive judgments rendered by the Civil Courts exonerating the petitioners respecting this very matter.
4. The arguments raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners go to the root of the case which can only be appreciated at the time of hearing of the appeal by the learned High Court when the entire evidence adduced by the parties would be thrashed out. In the circumstances of the present case no illegality has been committed by the learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court in dismissing the application for suspension of the sentence of the petitioners.
5. ' Before parting with this judgment, it would be appreciated if the petitioner's appeal is heard and disposed of by the learned High Court expeditiously.
6. ' The instant petition being without any force is dismissed and leave declined.
Cited by 1 case
- Haider Ali vs The State & another 2017 PHC 911