Case Details

Citation(s)
2026 SLD 3580 = 2026 MLD 938
Supreme Appellate Court Gilgit-Baltistan
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 174 of 2025 in Criminal Appeal No. 13 of 2025, decided on 2nd June, 2025.
Presented By: Ali Baig, C.J
Muzahir Ali for Appellant.        Zia Ullah L.A for
Respondents.

MAISUM ABBAS---Petitioner

VERSUS

The STATE through Divisional Forest Magistrate Gilgit and another---Respondents

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 426, 497, 498, 561-A

(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) Ss. 426, 497 & 561-A---Application under S.561-A, Cr.P.C.---Conditions of bail---Principles to be observed in grant of bail as well as in cases of suspension of sentence pending appeal---Short sentence---Scope---Likelihood that the appeal could not be decided within near future---Scope---Where appellant/petitioner has served the major portion of sentence; sentence shall not be suspended where role of the petitioner/appellant cannot be extracted without deeper appreciation of evidence---Powers of the appellate Court in granting bail at post conviction shall be guided by the criteria/process provided in S.497, Cr.P.C---Sentence should be suspended in appropriate course through tentative assessment of the evidence on record, if case of the convicted person is found fit for grant of bail; sentence can be suspended if on re-consideration of evidence the Court of appeal is of the view that conviction/sentence is not liable to be maintained by slightly touching the merits of the case without recording conclusion findings. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) Ss.561-A, 426 & 498---Gilgit Baltistan Forest Act (III of 2019), Ss. 41(b), (f), (n), 120 & 121---Cutting down trees---Suspension of sentence---Scope---Prosecution case was that the accused-petitioner without obtaining prior permission of competent authorities had cut down 02 live trees which was recovered from the accused---Case was submitted before the Forest Magistrate for legal proceedings---Forest Magistrate framed the charge against the accused-petitioner, wherein he had confessed his guilt and Forest Magistrate had convicted and sentenced him---Petitioner filed an appeal, but same was dismissed---Validity---Admittedly, the appellant/petitioner had been convicted and sentenced for 06-months imprisonment, which was a short sentence---Sentence awarded to the appellant/petitioner was short and lawyers of the region were on strike for the last 06 months and they were not appearing in regular appeals/revisions etc, except urgent matters---Before the criminal appeal of the appellant/petitioner was fixed for final arguments, it was quite possible that the…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register