' The petitioner/appellant namely Muhammad Mansoor has moved this petition under section 426, Cr.P.C. For the suspension of sentence and grant of bail to him while challenging his conviction under section 337-F(iv), P.P.C. For causing fire-arm injury to one Saib Khan P.W. In this case. Upon conviction, he was sentenced to five years' R.I. With the benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. And he was further sentenced to pay Rs,5,000 as Daman or in default to undergo six - months' S.I. Vide judgment, dated 14-5-1997, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chakwal.
2. It is contended that one of the appellants namely Nosherwan Khan with almost similar role was admitted to bail after his sentence was suspended vide order, dated 24-6-1997 passed by his lordship Munir A. Sheikh (since elevated to Supreme Court of Pakistan); that the case of the petitioner is not distinguishable from his co-accused Nosherwan Khan and as such, he was also entitled to bail; that in fact the complainant side was aggressor as two persons from the appellant side namely Nosherwan Khan and Mst. Naveed Begum had also suffered injuries. The former had fire-arm injuries, whereas, the injuries on the person of the latter were with sharp-edged weapon.
As such, it was alleged to be a clear cut case of self-defence; that it would also stem out from the judgment of the learned lower Court while reading it as a whole that by convicting the appellant/applicant, the learned trial Judge not only allegedly took erroneous view but also adopted contradictory stand in the impugned finding qua aggressor and the aggressed party. As such, it was prayed that the petitioner/appellant was entitled to bail after the suspension of sentence under section 426, Cr.P.C. Which was not controlled by the provisions contained in section 496/497, Cr.P.C. Although the principle laid down therein may be borne in mind in granting or refusing the bail. Reliance was placed on State v. Shah Sawar 1969 SCM R 151.
3. Learned counsel for the State, asstd by learned counsel for the complainant opposed the petition on the ground that the petitioner is not entitled to bail as a specific role was attributed to him in the F.I.R. And the same was proved at the trial for which, he was convicted as aforesaid. Reliance was placed on Muhammad Nawaz v. Muhammad Nawaz alias Naji and 4 others 1997 SCM R 1521 (Supreme Court of Pakistan).
4. I have considered the foregoing submissions and find that the principle laid down in 1997 SCM R 1521 is not applicable to the case in hand because in the reported case, the appellants/petitioners were convicted under section 302/ 148/149, P.P.C. And sentenced to imprisonment for life by the trial Court. However, in the instant case, the petitioner was convicted under section 337-F (iv), P.P.C. And sentenced to five years' R.I. Hence the present case is to be decided on its own merits.
5. It is clear from the judgment that the petitioner was convicted as he had caused injury to Saib Khan complainant/P.W. With the fire-arm at his leg. The provisions contained in section 426(1-A)
(b), Cr.P.C. Provides that if a person is convicted to imprisonment for a period exceeding three years but not exceeding seven years and whose appeal has not been decided within a period of one year of his conviction, he shall be entitled to bail. In this case, the aforesaid statutory period has not yet passed as the conviction of the appellant/applicant was made on 14-5-1997. The deeper appreciation of the merits of the appeal cannot be undertaken at this stage. It is enough to say that the case for the suspension of sentence or bail is not made out at present. The petition is dismissed.