PESHAWAR: The Peshawar High Court has turned down the plea of a man to suspend the life sentence awarded to him by the trial court for drug trafficking and to grant him bail until the disposal of his appeal pending before the Supreme Court.

While dismissing petition of Doctor Khan, a bench consisting of Justice Lal Jan Khattak and Justice Ishtiaq Ibrahim ruled that the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain bail in a case in which appeal against its judgement was pending with the Supreme Court.The petitioner has challenged a judgement of the high court of June 29, 2016, whereby his appeal against his conviction was rejected, before the Supreme Court by filing a leave to appeal petition.

The apex court had granted him leave to appeal on Oct 21,2021.

The petitioner/ convict was arrested by personnel of Hangu City police station on March 24, 2013, while he was driving a truck.

He was also accompanied by Javed Iqbal.

The police claimed that they had a tipoff about the smuggling of contraband, so they stopped that truck and seized 113kg charas.

The petitioner and Javed Iqbal were convicted by the trial court on April 2, 2014, and were awarded life imprisonment and a fine of Rs500,000 each.

Both convicts had bled appeals against the verdict with the high court.

While the appeal of Doctor Khan was dismissed, the high court accepted the plea of Javed leading to his acquittal on Sept 29, 2016.

Doctor Khan moved the Supreme Court with a leave to appeal petition, which is still pending decision.

The high court bench observed that it derived its power to grant bail pending appeal before the Supreme Court against the judgement of this court in a criminal case from 426 (2B) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The bench observed that the said provision was enacted in 1946, which provided that where a high court was satisfied that a convicted person has been granted special leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against any sentence which it has imposed or maintained, it may, if it so thinks fit orderthatpendingthe appealthe sentence or order appealed against be suspendedand also, if the said person is in conñnement, that he be released on bail.

The bench further observed that after independence of India and Pakistan, being alive to the situation, the Indian Law Commission recommended in 1969 that the said provision needed to be omitted from the statute following which the Indian Criminal Procedure Code was amended.

Furthermore, the bench pointed out that the Supreme Court had taken care of the matter in question while framing its rules under Article 191 of the Constitution.

The bench referred to Rule 11 in Chapter-XXII of the Supreme Court of Pakistan Rules, 1980, which states: `Pending the disposal of any appeal under this Order the Court may order that the execudon of the sentence or order appealed against be stayed on such terms as the court my think fit.

The bench after giving ruling in a case had no ofñcial authority to entertain it until and unless it could be shown why a petition for the suspension of the sentence could not be lodged in the ñrst instance before the Supreme Court.

The court ruled that when the Supreme Courthad alreadytakencognisance ofthe matter and while this court had already dismissed the appeal and had maintained the conviction recorded by the trial court; and when there was no legal impediment in the way of the petitioner to approach the apex court, the bench deemed it not proper to suspend the sentence awarded to the petitioner.