Criminal Miscellaneous No,1 of 2012 ' ABDUS SATTAR ASGHAR, J.---Muhammad Shahbaz petitioner faced the trial as a Juvenile accused in the Private Complaint under sections 302/392/396/148/149, P. P. C with regard to committing robbery and Qatl-e-amd of Jameel Ahmed during the occurrence. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kasur tried him under Juvenile Justice System and vide judgment dated 14-1-2010 has convicted him under section 302(b), P.P.C. And sentenced to imprisonment for life. He was also convicted under section 392, P.P.C. And sentenced to undergo 10 years' imprisonment with fine of Rs,50,000 and in default of which to undergo 6 months' SI. Ile was also directed to pay Rs,50,000 as compensation to the heirs of deceased Jameel Ahmad under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. And in default of same to undergo 6 months' SI. Benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Was also given to the petitioner.
The afore-noted convictions and sentences have been assailed through Criminal Appeal No,354- 2010 before this Court lodged on 11-2-2010, which is pending adjudication.
2. Through this application under section 426, Cr.P.C. Petitioner has sought suspension of his sentences on the ground that the titled appeal lodged on 11-2-2010 is pending disposal for the last more than two years and he is languishing in jail since 7-2-2007; that there is no probability of early conclusion of the titled appeal, therefore, he deserves suspension of sentence on the ground of statutory delay in terms of latest amendment under section 426(1A)(c), Cr.P.C. It is further contended that petitioner is neither a previous convict nor a hardened, desperate or dangerous criminal.
3. It is resisted by learned DDPP for the State assisted by learned counsel for the complainant with the arguments that the petitioner is sole perpetrator who caused the murder of Jameel Ahmed (deceased); that the petitioner is convicted and sentenced on the basis of reliable ocular account duly corroborated by medical evidence constituting sufficient incriminating material to connect him with the murder of Jameel Ahmad during robbery; that the petitioner is a.Desperate criminal, therefore, he is excluded for concession of suspension of his sentence in terms of 1st proviso of section 426(1A)(c) of Cr.P.C.
4. I have given patient hearing to the learned counsel for the parties, learned DDPP for the State and perused the record with their able assistance.
5. At the outset, it will be expedient to reproduce the relevant provision of section 426(1A)(c) of the Cr.P.C. For ready reference:- "426(1A)---An Appellate Court shall, except where it is of the opinion that the delay in the decision of appeal has been occasioned by an act or omission of the appellant or any other person acting on his behalf order a convicted person to be released on bail who has been sentenced
(c) to imprisonment for life or imprisonment exceeding seven years and whose appeal has not been decided within a period of two years of his conviction. Provided that the provisions of the foregoing paragraph shall not apply to a previously convicted offender for an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life or to a person who in the opinion of the Appellate Court, is a hardened-desperate or dangerous criminal or is accused of an act of terrorism punishable with death or imprisonment for life."
6. Bare reading of the afore-noted provision makes it crystal clear that right of a convict for suspension of the sentence on statutory ground of delay in disposal of appeal cannot be denied except on the grounds mentioned in the 1st proviso of section 426(1A)(c), Cr.P.C. The word 'desperate' no doubt bear an importance. Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary defines the word 'desperate' as 'extremely dangerous; serious or bad: The scheme of legislation in the above referred provision of procedure clearly manifests a complete mechanism to protect the right of liberty of the convict when it becomes due in accordance with law, however, discretion of the court is extended only to the extent of the reasons mentioned in the Ist proviso of section 426(1-A)(c), Cr.P.C. And not beyond that.
7. In, the instant case, the petitioner along with his co-accused with muffled faces tried to rob a motorcycle from the complainant party and during the scuffle when his face was disclosed he immediately started straight firing resulting into murder of Jameel Ahmed attracting the offences under section 392/302, P.P.C. Although petitioner is juvenile offender but he is involved in a heinous offence of robbery and causing murder. Alleged act of the petitioner prima facie render him a 'desperate' criminal not entitled to concession of release on bail through suspension of sentence.
Petitioner's plea for suspension of sentence is hit by the exception manifested in the first proviso of section 426(1-A)(c), Cr.P.C. Petitioner, therefore, has no case for suspension of sentence on the ground of statutory delay in the decision of appeal.
8. For the above discussion and reasons, this petition having no merit is dismissed. However, observations made in this order are tentative in nature and will not prejudice the merits of the case in appeal.