2014 PLP 1898 (YLR)
MUHAMMAD KHAN — Appellant Versus The STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2014 PLP 1898 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Syed Iftikhar Hussain Shah, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD KHAN — Appellant Versus The STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2014 PLP 1898 (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 2014 PLP 1898 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Syed Iftikhar Hussain Shah, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2014 PLP 1898 (YLR) (MUHAMMAD KHAN — Appellant Versus The STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Muhammad Akhtar Minhas, for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 426
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.337-A(ii)
Causing Shajjah-i-Mudihah
Accused who was convicted under S.337-A(II), P.P.C., was sentenced to three years' R.I. with Arsh of five pre cent of Diyat
Sentence awarded to accused was short, hearing of appeal filed by accused against his conviction and sentence, in the near future was not insight; and the possibility of serving the whole sentence by accused during pendency of appeal, could not be ruled out
Petition filed by accused for suspension of sentence during pendency of his appeal, was allowed and sentence imposed on accused, was suspended till final decision of his appeal; and he was admitted to bail, in circumstances. Manzoor Ahmed v. Fazal Ahmed and 3 others 2013 SCMR 1403 distinguished. Abdul Hameed v. Muhammad Abdullah 1999 SCMR 2589 and Nazeer Ali alias Nazeer v. The State 2011 YLR 403 rel. Qazi Ibrar Hassan, for the Complainant. Ch. Qaisar Mushtaq, ADDPP with Muhammad Tavir A.S.-I. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
SYED IFTIKHAR HUSSAIN SHAH, J.
Muhammad Khan, petitioner, has made this petition under section 426 Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence awarded to him vide judgment dated 31-8-2013 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Talagang in case F.I.R. No. 92 dated 14-10-2011 registered under section 302/337-A(ii)/337-A(i)/337-L(ii)/34 P.P.C. at Police Station, Lawa Tehsil Talagang District Chakwal whereby he was convicted under sections 337-A(ii) and was sentenced three years' R.I. with Arsh of 5% of Diyat. He was also given the benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C.
2. The petitioner along with his co-accused Zahid Iqbal and Shahid Iqbal was tried by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Talagang for committing the murder of Muhammad Nawaz and Muhammad Khan for committing the murderous assault on Fateh Khan and injuring him.
3. The case was registered on 14-10-2011 at Police Station, Lawa under sections 302/337-A(ii)/337-A(i)/337-L(ii)/ 34, P.P.C. on the complaint of one Muhammad Shahzad.
4. Learned trial Court after recording the evidence and hearing the parties, convicted Zahid Iqbal and Shahid Iqbal under section 302(b) P.P.C. and sentenced them to imprisonment for life with compensation of Rs. 5,00,000 each. However, the present petitioner Muhammad Khan was convicted under section 337-A(ii) P.P.C. and was sentenced to undergo three years' R.I. with Arsh of 5% of Diyat.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the prosecution has failed to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt and he was convicted only under section 337-A(ii) P.P.C. and the sentence awarded to him is short one and there is no likelihood of hearing of appeal in the near future and he may undergo all the sentences awarded to him till the appeal is fixed for hearing. Therefore he is entitled to the suspension of his sentence.
6. On the other hand, the application is opposed from the complainant side and it is contended that the petitioner was convicted on 31-8-2013. He was charged under section 302 P.P.C. for committing the murder of Muhammad Nawaz and Muhammad Khan under section 324 Cr.P.C. for committing murderous assault on Fateh Khan. The learned trial Court had already taken the lenient view while awarding the sentence to the petitioner only under section 337-A(ii) P.P.C. Therefore, he is not entitled to the suspension of sentence at this early stage.
7. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned ADPP for the State and the learned counsel for the complainant and have also perused the available record.
8. Although the petitioner was charged under section 302/34 P.P.C. and section 337-A(ii) P.P.C. but he has been convicted by the learned trial court under section 337-A(ii) P.P.C. and has been sentenced to three years' R.I. with Arsh of 5 % of Diyat.
9. The sentence is short one but the co-accused has been convicted for life imprisonment and the hearing of the appeal in the near future is not insight and the possibility of serving the whole sentence by the appellant during the pendency of appeal cannot be ruled out.
10. The facts of case-law relied upon by the learned counsel for the complainant cited as Manzoor Ahmed v. Fazal Ahmed and 3 others (2013 SCMR 1403) are not directly applicable to the facts and circumstances of the present case. In the aforesaid case, the accused has caused injuries at the person of the deceased but in this case no injury has been attributed to the deceased by the present petitioner. He had given a danda blow on the head of Fateh Muhammad who did not appear in the Court as witness.
11. For the foregoing reasons and relying on Abdul Hameed v. Muhammad Abdullah (1999 SCMR 2589) and Nazeer Ali alias Nazeer v. The State (2011 YLR 403), the instant petition is hereby allowed and the sentence imposed by the petitioner is hereby suspended till the final decision of the appeal. In the meanwhile he is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.200,000 with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Deputy Registrar (J) of this Court. HBT/M-263/L Sentence respondent.