MIAN MUHAMMAD NAJAM-UZ-ZAMAN, J. ---Petitioners seek suspension of sentence awarded to them in terms of the judgment of the learned trial Court dated 18-11-2000 (in case registered vide F.
I. R. No. 120 of 1996 under sections 148/302/149, P.P.C. At Police Station Ahmad Yar, District Pakpattan Sharif). Petitioners alongwith Amir were convicted under section 302(b), P.P.C., while Amir was sentenced to death and petitioners were sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine.
2. The prosecution story as given in the F. I. R. And as set out in trial is narrated in para. 2 of the judgment which is as under: "Muhammad Ameer alias Beeri, Razzaq alias Zaqi accused armed with pistols .12 bore, Hanif accused armed with pistol .30 bore, Ghulam Shabbir accused armed with rifle, Mansha accused armed with gun .12 bore who were hiding behind the wall suddenly emerged there and encircled Muhammad Irshad deceased. Muhammad Hanif accused raised lalkara that Muhammad Irshad should not be kept alive. Muhammad Ameer accused fired with pistol .12 bore and the shot hit at the backside of the head of Muhammad Irshad who fell down on the ground. Razzaq, Shabbir and Mansha accused fired in the air."
The motive alleged is that earlier brother of Ameer accused was murdered in the year 1993 and a case vide FJ.R. No.34 of 1993 under section 302/34, P.P.C. Was registered at Police Station Ahmad Yar.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has sought suspension on the grounds that only ineffective firing is attributed to the petitioners; that they are not connected with the motive part of the prosecution story; that petitioners Nos.2 and 3 were declared innocent during the investigation; that no empties were recovered which could corroborate the ocular account of ineffective firing; that the conviction is passed in the private complaint case and that the very -conviction of the petitioners is not sustainable in law. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, opposed the prayer that it is only a recent judgment that the petitioners are vicariously liable under sections 148/149, P.P.C. As they formed unlawful assembly and at this stage this is not a case for suspensation of sentence.
4. Heard.
5. Admittedly, the role attributed to the petitioners is that of ineffective firing; nothing was recovered from the petitioners Nos.2 and 3 and they are not directly connected with the motive part of the prosecution story either. A Prima facie the conviction recorded to their extent may require re---examination. That being so, the instant petition is allowed, sentence of the petitioners is suspended and they Shall be released on bail subject to their furnishing bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (Rupees one lac) with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.