PLJ 2024 Cr.C. (Note) 8
[Lahore High Court, Multan Bench]
Present: Muhammad Amjad Rafiq, J.
GHAZANFAR ALI@ NOMAN @ NOMA--Appellant
versus
STATE etc.--Respondents
Crl. A. No. 297-J of 2021, and Crl. Misc. No. 3/2023,
decided on 10.10.2023.
Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)--
----S. 426--Pakistan Penal Code, (XLV of 1860), S. 302/324/34--Conviction and sentence--Suspension of sentence--Statutory ground--Hardened or dangerous or desperate criminal--Petitioner seeks suspension of sentence awarded to him--He caused injuries with Repeater 12 bore on left shin of deceased--Such injury was counted by doctor as entry wound with an exit--This petition purely on statutory ground as petitioner is behind bars--After lapse of more than two years his appeal has not been decided--No repetition is attributed to petitioner to tag him as hardened, desperate or dangerous criminal--The statutory period for decision of such like appeals is two years--The said period has already expired--Delay in decision of appeal is no attributed to him--It mandatory for Court to grant such relief to convict unless case of petitioner falls in exception--Neither petitioner is desperate, hardened or dangerous criminal nor convicted of any offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life or an accused of offence of terrorism punishable with death and imprisonment for life--Application for suspension of sentence is allowed. [Para 5 & 6] A, B, C, D & E
2017 SCMR 91; 1997 MLD 2881 ref.
Kh. Qaisar Butt, Advocate for Petitioner.
Mr. Tanvir Haider Buzdar, ADPP.
Nemo for Complainant.
Date of hearing: 10.10.2023.
Order
Through the instant petition, the petitioner seeks suspension of sentence (imprisonment for life) awarded to him by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, KehrorPacca District Lodhran, vide judgment dated 05.04.2021 in case FIR No. 60 dated 27.01.2020 under Sections 302/324/34 Police Station Saddar Kehror Pacca District Lodhran.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner without touching the merits of the case has submitted that he has filed this petition on statutory ground for delay in hearing of appeal and that the petitioner is behind the bars for the last more than 3½ years.
3. On the other hand, learned Assistant District Public Prosecutor has opposed this petition.
4 Heard. Record perused.
5. The petitioner was under the allegation that the caused injuries with Repeator 12 bore on the left shin of the deceased. Such injury was counted by the doctor as entry wound with an exit. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that he has brought this petition purely on statutory ground as the petitioner is behind the bars since 21.02.2020, impugned judgment was passed on 05.04.2021, instant appeal was filed on 15.04.2021 and since then after lapse of more than two years his appeal has not been decided. No. repetition is attributed to the petitioner to tag him as hardened, desperate or dangerous criminal.
6. Without going into the merits of the case, suffice it to observe that sentence in his case was recorded on 05.04.2021 and the instant appeal was filed on 15.04.2021. In view of amendment brought in Section 426, Cr.P.C., the statutory period for decision of such like appeals is two years. The said period has already expired in the case of present petitioner. Delay in decision of appeal is not attributable to him. The use of word “shall” in Section 426 (1-A), Cr.P.C. makes it mandatory for the Court to grant such relief to the convict unless the case of the petitioner falls in exception mentioned in proviso to above said sub-section, however, no such exception could be found in the instant case as observed above that neither petitioner is desperate, hardened or dangerous criminal nor convicted of any offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life or an accused of offence of terrorism punishable with death and imprisonment for life. Thus, petitioner is entitled to be released on bail by way of suspension of his sentence. Reliance is placed on judgments reported as “Sultan Mehmood vs Kaleem Ullah and others” (2017 SCMR 91) and “Mazhar alias Mazharee and 3 others vs. The State” (1997 MLD 2881). Consequently, instant application is allowed and sentence of the petitioner is suspended. He shall be released on bail (if not required in any other case) subject to furnishing bail bond in the sum of
Rs. 2,00,000/- (two lacs) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Deputy Registrar (Judl.) of this Court. He shall remain incessant in appearing before this Court till the final decision of main appeal.
(M.A.B.) Application allowed
0 Comments