2023 P Cr (PLP)

MUHAMMAD TARIQ NADEEM, J.

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 01 of 2020 Through this application under section 426, Cr.P.C. petitioner Mohammad Sajid craves suspension of his sentence and admitting him to bail pending disposal of above titled appeal. He has been convicted and sentenced vide judgment dated 22.03.2017 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jahanian, in case FIR No. 25/ 2015 dated 15.02.2015 for offences under sections 302, 324, 34, P.P.C. registered at Police Station Thatha Sadiq-abad, District Khanewal, as under:- Under section 302, P.P.C. Sentenced to imprisonment for life with payment of Rs.200,000/- as compensation as contemplated under section 544, Cr.P.C. or six months' SI in the event of default. Benefit of section 382-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 was extended to the petitioner.

2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner/appellant that two years have already been elapsed; the disposal of the main appeal is not possible in near future; the petitioner's case is fully covered under section 426(1-A)(c), Cr.P.C. as he is neither desperate, dangerous or hardened criminal and has also not been convicted previously in offence of a like nature and that there is no contribution of the petitioner-appellant in non-disposal of the main appeal.

3. On the other hand, learned Mr. Hassan Mehmood Khan Tareen. Deputy Prosecutor General has opposed the prayer for suspension of sentence and has laid much stress on the disposal of the main appeal on merits

4. Contentions heard. Judgment gone through.

5. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner/appellant, as well as, learned Deputy Prosecutor General and going through the impugned judgment, it has straightway been noticed by this Court that petitioner was convicted and sentenced vide judgment dated 22.03.2017 against which the titled appeal has been filed before this Court on 07.04.2017. Appeal pertains to the year 2017, therefore, chances of hearing are still in bleak. There is no contribution of the petitioner in non-disposal of the main appeal. Two years have already been elapsed since the pendency of the appeal, therefore, this Court is of the view that the petitioner has earned the right of his release on bail on the ground of statutory delay. There is haunting silence on record that the petitioner is desperate, dangerous or hardened criminal or he was previously convicted in a case of similar nature. A reference in this respect may be made to the cases reported as "Liaqat and another v. The State" (1995 SCMR 1819) and "Naveed alias Navidi v. The State" (2011 PCr.LJ 1971). Record further reveals that the petitioner has already served out a period of 06 years and 16 days. He was arrested in this case on 10.05.2015. There is a possibility that in case his sentence is not suspended, pending this appeal, lest he should not serve out his entire sentence rendering his appeal infructuous and if ultimately he earns an acquittal, he might not be compensated for incarceration. Under the circumstances, without touching merits of the case. I allow this petition and suspend the sentence of the petitioner. He is directed to be released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five hundred thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Deputy Registrar (Judl.) of this Bench. The petitioner is, however, directed to remain incessant before this Court on each and every date of hearing of his appeal. SA/M-177/L Sentence suspended.