2012 PLP 1013 (YLR)
WASEEM — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2012 PLP 1013 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Rauf Ahmad Shaikh and Mazhar Iqbal Sidhu, JJ |
| Parties | WASEEM — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2012 PLP 1013 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2012 PLP 1013 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Rauf Ahmad Shaikh and Mazhar Iqbal Sidhu, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2012 PLP 1013 (YLR) (WASEEM — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
S. 426
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302(b)/34
Suspension of sentence on ground of statutory delay
Despite the expiry of more than two years appeal of accused had not been decided by High Court so far
Record did not present any antecedents of the accused of having been involved in any case of alike nature or of terrorism
No remarkable circumstance had been found to prevent the accused from seeking the relief prayed for
Statutory right had accrued in favour of accused and his case did not fall within any exceptional clause of S.426, Cr.P.C.
Sentence of accused was suspended in circumstances and he was released on bail accordingly. Rai Salah ud Din Kharal for Applicant. Shahid Ali Shakir for the Complainant. Arshad Mehmood, D.P.G. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
MAZHAR IQBAL SIDHU, J.
By instituting an application under section 426, Cr.P.C., Waseem son of Allah Yar appli-cant being doomed has sought suspension of sentence imposed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jaranwala vide judgment dated 30-6-2008 in case F.I.R. No.32 of 2005 dated 25-1-2005 for the offence under sections 302/34, P.P.C. registered at Police Station Satiana. Faisalabad, whereby he has been punished as under:-- Conviction Sentence Under sec-tion 302(b)/ 34, P.P.C. Imprisonment for life and to pay Rs.50,000 as compensa-tion and in default whereof to further undergo six months' S.I. He was also extended the benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the impugned judgment was pronounced on 30-6-2008, two years have elapsed and the applicant's appeal has not yet been decided; the applicant is neither criminal nor desperate and has also not been involved ever in terrorism and because of advent of benevolent amendment in section 426 Cr.P.C., the applicant is entitled for the suspension of sentence and the grant of bail.
3. The submissions have been opposed by learned D.P.-G. assisted by learned counsel for the complainant.
4. Heard. Record perused.
5. The occurrence pertains to year 2005; the impugned judgment was handed down in the year 2008 and after that more than two years have passed and the applicant's appeal has not been decided so far. Record presents no antecedents of the applicant of having been involved in any case of alike nature or in terrorism. No remarkable circumstance has been found to be mulcted of the applicant from the relief sought for. As the statutory right has accrued in favour of the applicant and his case does not fall within the exceptional clauses of the amendment, therefore, by accepting the instant application quantum of sentence of the applicant is suspended and he is directed to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.200,000 (rupees two lac) with one surety in the like amount to the satis-faction of D.R. (Judicial) of this Court. Applicant is directed to continue appearing before this Court till the final disposal of the appeal. N.H.Q./W-15/L Sentence suspended.