ALI ZIA BAJW A, J.---Through the instant petition filed under section 426, Cr.P.C., Sajjad Hussain (applicant) seeks suspension of operation of impugned judgment dated 04.02.2016 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge-II, Jampur , in case FIR No.143/2014, dated 24.05.2014, registered under section 302, P.P.C., with Police Station Saddar Jampur , District Rajanpur , whereby the learned trial court convicted the applicant under section 302(b), P.P.C. and sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life with a direction to pay Rs.1,00,000/- as compensation to the legal heirs of deceased under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. or in default thereof to undergo S.I. for six months. He was also extended benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Challenging his conviction and sentence, the applicant has filed the titled Criminal Appeal.
2. After hearing learned counsel for the applicant, learned Deputy Prosecutor General and going through the record available on the file, it has been noticed by this Court that the appellant was not named in the crime report, which was lodged against the unknown accused. The only evidence available on record against the appellant is Wajtakar furnished by Muhammad Sadiq and Ghulam Yaseen, who are paternal uncles of the complainant as well as deceased and despite the fact that they were residents of same vicinity , their names were not mentioned in the crime report. Similarly , no identification parade was held in this case. In absence of any motive for the commission of the alleged offence, the upholding of the sentence imposed upon the appellant in peculiar circumstances of the case require very serious consideration, which can be undertaken at the time of hearing of appeal. The appellant has already undergone sentence of about eight and half years, whereas disposa l of main criminal appeal is not within sight in near future. As such, I am constrained to observe that liberty of a person being precious right, which is also guaranteed under the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 coupled with the fact that if after suffering the incarceration in jail, the petitioner is acquitted, how he could be comp ensated for his incarceration, as there is no reparatory arrangement so far provided in any law including the Cr.P.C. to compensate him for incarceration in prison for years, while to the contrary subsection (3) of section 426, Cr.P.C. provides that while computing the sentence of the convict, the period during which his sentence was suspended and he was released on bail, shall be excluded from the total period of Sentence, he has to undergo. Thus, at this stage, the ground of statutory delay is also available to the appellant. Even otherwise, the petitioner is' neither hardened nor desperate criminal.
3. Resultantly , without touching merits of the case, the instant Criminal Miscellan eous is allowed and sentence awarded to the appellant/applicant by the learned trial Court is hereby suspended and he is ordered to be released on bail in present case subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lacs only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court. He be directed to appear before this Court on each and every date of hearing till the final decision of main appeal.