2014 P Cr (PLP)
SHARAFAT alias BODA — Petitioner Versus The STATE and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2014 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | SHARAFAT alias BODA — Petitioner Versus The STATE and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2014 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2014 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2014 P Cr (PLP) (SHARAFAT alias BODA — Petitioner Versus The STATE and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mian Tariq Hussain for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 426
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.376(1)
Statutory delay in disposal of appeal
Accused was convicted for rape and sentenced to 17 years' imprisonment by the Trial Court
More than 2 years had gone by since accused filed an appeal against his conviction for rape, but the same had not been disposed of as yet
Delay in hearing of appeal was not occasioned by the accused
No likelihood existed of hearing of appeal in the near future
Accused was a juvenile when he was tried and convicted by the Trial Court
Nothing on record showed that accused was a previous convict or was a hardened, desperate or dangerous criminal or was an accused of an act of terrorism punishable with death or imprisonment for life
Sentence of accused was suspended in circumstances and he was released on bail.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD YAWAR ALI, J.
The petitioner Sharafat alias Boda was tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Hafizabad in case F.I.R. No.403/2009 dated 27-9-2009 for an offence under section 376(1), P.P.C. registered at Police Station Kassoke District Hafizabad who vide judgment dated 31-7-2010 convicted and sentenced the petitioner as follows:-- Under section 376(1), P.P.C. 17 years Rigorous Imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,00,
000. In case of non-payment of fine to further undergo 6 months' Simple Imprisonment.
2. Benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. was also extended in favour of the petitioner.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner seeks suspension of sentence of the petitioner on statutory grounds and submits that the petitioner was arrested on 29-9-2009 and convicted by the trial Court on 31-7-2010. The petitioner who filed his appeal on 2-10-2010 before this court is behind the bars till today. The delay in disposal of the appeal has not been occasioned by the petitioner.
4. No one is present on behalf of the complainant in spite of being informed about the fixation of case by Najam S.I.
5. The learned Additional Prosecutor-General while opposing the petition submits that the petitioner has been convicted by the trial Court on the basis of a well-reasoned judgment. The petitioner committed a heinous offence, hence is not entitled to the concession of bail by way of suspension of sentence. Miscarriage of justice would be caused in case the petitioner is allowed bail as he is a hardened, desperate and dangerous criminal.
6. In normal course of events the petitioner would be entitled to bail on the ground that more than two years have gone by and there is no likelihood of hearing of the appeal filed by the petitioner in the near future. There is nothing on the record to show that the petitioner is a previous convict or is a hardened, desperate or dangerous criminal or is an accused of an act of terrorism punishable with death or imprisonment for life. The criminal appeal was filed on 2-10-2010, more than two years have gone by but the same has not been disposed of till today. The delay in hearing of the appeal has not been caused by the petitioner and by virtue of an amendment incorporated in section 426, Cr.P.C. the petitioner has become entitled for suspension of sentence. The petitioner was juvenile when he was tried and convicted by the trial Court.
7. For what has been stated above, this petition is allowed, sentence of imprisonment of the petitioner is suspended and he is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.2,00,000 (rupees two hundred thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Deputy Registrar (J) of this Court. The petitioner, shall appear before this court in person on each and every date of hearing till the final disposal of the main appeal. MWA/S-24/L Sentence suspended.