Find a Lawyer

Miscellaneous Application No.1668 of 2014 in Criminal Appeal No.S-24 of 2014, decided on 17th July, 2014.

----S.426---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 395 & 452---Dacoity and house trespass---Sentence, suspension of---Consent of complainant---Accused persons were convicted under Ss. 395 & 452, P.P.C. for imprisonment for seven years and five years respectively---Validity---Deeper appreciation of evidence could not be undertaken at such stage---Complainant and eyewitnesses who were present in Court extended their no objection in shape of affidavits to suspension of sentences awarded to accused persons and their release on bail---Sentences were suspended in circumstances. Ghulam Nabi and others v. The State 1995 PCr.LJ 1606; Syed Iftikhar Hussain Shah v. Syed Sabir Hussain Shah and 2 others 1998 SCMR 466 and Siraj and 2 others v. The State 2013 PCr.LJ 398 ref. Bakhshan Khan Mahar for Applicants. Abdul Rehman Kolachi, A.P.G. for the State.

Through the instant application under section 426, Cr.P.C, the appellants seek suspension of sentences awarded to them vide impugned judgment dated 28-3-2014 passed by the learned III-Additional Sessions Judge, Mirpur Mathelo in Sessions Case No. 474/2009, whereby the appellants were convicted under section 395, P.P.C. and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and also to pay fine of Rs.25,000 each. They have further been convicted under section 452, P.P.C. and sentenced them rigorious imprisonment for five years each. They were also convicted under sections 147, 148 and 149, P.P.C. and sentenced to suffer S.I. for 6 months. It was also ordered that all these sentences will run concurrently with benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Learned counsel for the appellants contended that parties have compromised the matter outside the Court. The complainant Mst. Qadul wife of Kamal by caste Dhoondho and eye-witness Mst. Rasheeda daughter of Kamal by caste Dhoondho have filed their affidavits today in the Court wherein they have stated that they have forgiven the appellants namely Muhammad Ramzan son of Oad and Abdul Majeed son of Hakim in the name of Allah. It is further contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that though the offences are not compoundable but in spite of that, the superior courts have taken a lenient view in such type of cases wherein the parties have effected the compromise. The reliance is placed on the cases of Ghulam Nabi and others v. The State (1995 PCr.LJ page 1606), Syed lftikhar Hussain Shah v. Syed Sabir Hussain Shah and 2 others (1998 SCMR 466) and Siraj and 2 others v. The State (2013 PCr.LJ 398). It is further contended by the leaned counsel for the appellants that the appellants are in custody since 28-3-2014. He has further submitted that prior to conviction these appellants were on bail. He has further submitted that this appeal is pending for the last four months and sentences awarded to the appellants are short and the appeal has already been admitted and there is no chance that this appeal will be heard in near future due to heavy backlog of the cases. The complainant Mst. Qadul and eye-witness Mst. Rashida daughter of complainant are present along with their counsel Mr. Illahi Bux Jamali who has filed his Vakalatnama today in Court. The contents of the affidavit have been verified by learned A.P.G who is present in Court and has raised no objection if the sentences awarded to the appellants are suspended and they be released on bail in the afore mentioned facts and circumstances of the case. I have considered the arguments of learned counsel for the parties. The deeper appreciation of the evidence cannot be undertaken at this stage. The complainant and eye-witness who are present in Court have extended their no objection in the shape of affidavits to the suspension of sentences awarded to the appellants and their release on bail. Accordingly while taking in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the sentences awarded to the appellants are hereby suspended during the pendency of this appeal and they are directed to be released on bail subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.100,000 each and P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Additional Registrar of this Court. MH/M-152/Sindh Sentence suspended.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.