Munir Ahmed, victim of criminal assault has moved this cancellation petition against Shaukat Ali respondent. Shaukat Ali, Riaz Ahmed, sons of Shukar Din and their father Shukar Din were tried by a Magistrate at Shakkar Garh, who found Shaukat Ali guilty and convicted him under section 337- A(ii), P.P.C. And punished him with three years' S.I., however, Riaz Ahmed and Shukar Din were acquitted of the charge. Shaukat Ali appealed against the said judgment and order passed by the learned Magistrate to call in question conviction and sentence recorded against him before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shakkar Garh. The appeal was admitted to regular hearing on 9-3-2000. A petition under section 426, Cr.P.C. For suspension of sentence passed against respondent was also moved on his behalf on that very day. The learned Additional Sessions Judge while admitting the appeal to regular hearing proceeded to suspend the sentence of the respondent on the same day.
2. Notice to respondent No,1 was issued who is present in Court along with his counsel.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Additional Sessions Judge had not passed a valid order and it was a capricious exercise of discretion vested in him. He next submits that the order has been passed in flagrant violation of the settled principles governing the proposition relating to suspension of sentence and that the order was not maintainable.
4. As against this learned counsel for the respondent submits that the learned Additional Sessions Judge had the power to suspend the sentence passed against the respondent and that the order was perfectly legal.
5. Learned Law Officer submits that the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge was a speaking order and he was not supposed to furnish reasons in support of his order.
6. Learned counsel for both the sides have been heard at length and the impugned order perused word by word, nay letter by letter. Only the contention of learned counsel for the respondent has been mentioned, that the impugned judgment is against law and facts and that evidence had not been appreciated in its true perspective. It is nowhere indicated in the order that the said Judge ever perused the judgment and tried to ascertain as to what part had been assigned to the petitioner in the occurrence. Perusal of the judgment of the trial Court indicates that the respondent was carrying a hatchet at the relevant time of occurrence, made use of the same and inflicted an injury on head of Munir Ahmed, which is considered to be most vital organ of the body.
Anyhow no fracture occurred in the underlying bone. Bone was merely exposed because of the injury. The learned Additional Sessions Judge did not take into his consideration complete facts and circumstances of the case and I find that his order is devoid of judicial reasons capable of articulate expressions, which could be designated as a patent illegality. It appears to have been passed in great haste, without adverting to law and facts. Accordingly, I accept this petition and set aside the order dated 9-3-2000 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. Bail of the respondent is hereby cancelled.
7. The learned Judge shall take necessary steps towards committing the respondent to custody to serve out his sentence.
8. It is directed that the appeal filed by the respondent shall be decided within two months on the receipt of this order.