1983 P Cr (PLP)

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)- -- S. 426-Suspension of sentence-Ex facie case for suspension of sentence made out-Bail allowed to petitioner in circumstances of case. Qazi Muhammad Saleem for Petitioner. Nemo for the State. The petitioner was convicted by Malik Muhammad Afzal, Additional Sessions Judge, Faisalabad, vide his order dated 4th July, 1981 and sentenced to four years' R.I. under section 326, P. P. C. and a fine of Rs. 2,000 in default of payment of fine to suffer .six .months' R. I., for having caused grievous injuries to Ibrahim. He was further sentenced to one year's R. I. and fine of Rs. 500 or in default to suffer one month's R. I. under section 324, P. P. C. on four counts, for causing injuries to Arshad, Ashraf, Ikram and Afzal. He was tried alongwith five others in a complaint filed by Ibrahim under sections 302/307/324/149 and 148, P. P. C. for having caused the death of Ghulam Farid and having inflicted injuries on the persons of Ibrahim, Ikram Arshad, Afzal and Ashraf. All his co-accused were acquitted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge vide the same order.

2. The petitioner has sought suspension of sentences on the ground that a case F. I. R. No. 133, dated 11th September, 1979 was registered on the statement of Hussain Bakhsb, regarding the murder of abovesaid Ghulam Farid against abovesaid Ibrahim and five others which included his four sons. Mushtaq petitioner was injured P. W. in the said case against Ibrahim and others. The challan case was also tried by the same learned Additional Sessions Judge who acquitted Muhammad Ikram and Liaqat accused in the F. I. R. but convicted and sentenced the other accused including Ibrahim to various terms of rigorous imprisonment and fine. It is contended on, behalf of the peti tioner that the learned trial Court has disbelieved the version of the com plainant and his P. Ws. in so far as the commission of murder of Ghulam Farid by the petitioner or his other co-accused is concerned, rather the complainant and his other co-accused including his three sons were held liable for having caused the death of Ghulam Farid. It is argued that the learned Additional Sessions Judge having in full view of the picture failed to take note of the fact that having. disbelieved the story of the complainant regarding the occurrence of murder of Ghulam Farid stated by Ibrahim and finding that Ibrahim and his associates were responsible for the death of Ghulam Farid, should not have placed any reliance on the statements of Ibrahim and other P. Ws. named by him in the complaint. Another fact that has been pointed out pertinently is that the main evidence on which the learned trial Judge has placed reliance for passing the order of conviction and sentences is the statement of Mushtaq petitioner. It is contended that the trial Judge has wrongly assumed that Mushtaq had admitted to have caused injuries to Ibrahim, which faet is not supported by the record. Learned counsel has also pointed out that the only grievous injury which has attracted the provisions of section 326, P. P. C. was found to have been suffered on the index finger. The offence under section 324, P. P. C. is of course bailable.

3. I have gone through the judgment and seen the record. In the circumstances enumerated above an ex facie case for suspension of sentence is made out. The petitioner shall be released on 'bail provided A he furnishes bail bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the, satisfaction of the Assistant Commisioner, Faisalabad. M.Y.H. Sentence suspended.