' SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, J.---Through the instant petition filed under. Section 426, Cr.P C. Shafiq Ahmad alias Kala, petitioner has sought for suspension of his sentence' and admitting him to bail pending disposal of the above-mentioned appeal.
2. Being involved in case. F.I.R. No,158 of 2004, dated 20-4-2008, offence under sections 302, 452, 337A(ii), 337L(2), 337F(i), 34 P.P.C., registered with Police Station, Langrana, Chiniot, the petitioner was tried by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chiniot, who .Vide judgment dated 25-6-2011, convicted the petitioner as under:--
(i) Under section 302(b), P.P.C., and sentenced him to imprisonment for life as Ta'zir.
(ii) Under section 337A(ii), P.P.C.And sentenced to imprisonment for five years' R.I. And arsh equal to 5% of the Diyyat notified by the Government in the year 2004 for causing hurt to Mst.Nazeeran.
(iii) Under section 337-L(2), P.P.C., and sentenced to imprisonment for two years' R.I. With daman of Rs,5,000.
(iv) Under section 337 F(i); P.P.C., and sentenced to imprisonment for one year's R.I. And daman of Rs,5,000 for causing injuries to Mst.Nazeeran and Mst.Samina Bibi.
' All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently and benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C.. Was also extended in favour of the petitioner.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned trial Court has misled the evidence available on record, which has resulted into grave miscarriage of justice. It is contended that the petitioner is ascribed the role of causing injury to Ramzan (deceased) on his left arm with sota, which, is simple in nature. It is next submitted that due to the injuries caused by co-accused of the petitioner, the deceased had fallen on the ground and thereafter the petitioner had given the sota blow to the deceased in fallen condition. It is argued that the injury ascribed to the petitioner is not the cause of death. Learned counsel submits that as far as injuries sustained by the injured P.Ws. In the instant case are concerned, no specific role has been attributed to the petitioner, rather a joint role of causing injuries to the injured P.Ws. Has been given. It is argued that the petitioner is behind the bars since 21-6-2004 and there is no likelihood of fixation of main appeal in near future, therefore, the petitioner is entitled to the relief prayed for by means of instant petition.
4. Contrarily, learned Deputy Prosecutor-General has opposed this petition with the averments that the petitioner is nominated in the F.I.R. With specific role. Moreover, the learned trial Court while appreciating the evidence in its true perspective has very rightly convicted the petitioner and no exception can be made to the same at this early stage. It is submitted that sota has been recovered from the petitioner.
5. Arguments heard. Record available on file perused.
6. As far as injury ascribed to the petitioner sustained by the deceased is concerned, the same is simple in nature. There is general allegation of causing injuries to the prosecution witnesses namely Naziran Bibi, Samina Bibi and Saima Bibi against the petitioner along with his co-accused.
But during the course of trial,. Saima Bibi, injured P.W. Was not produced by the prosecution to substantiate the injuries. The petitioner is behind the bars since 21-6-2004 and as such he has already suffered about eight years incarceration. There is no likelihood of fixation of main appeal in near' future.
7. For what has been discussed above, this Court is persuaded to suspend the conviction and sentence inflicted upon the petitioner by the learned trial Court. Resultantly, the instant petition is accepted and conviction and sentence awarded to the petitioner is suspended and the petitioner is admitted to bail pending disposal of the main appeal subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs,1,00,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.