FAYYAZ HUSSAIN and others vs THE STATE
This matter concerns an application filed by three convicts seeking an order for their sentences in two separate criminal cases to run concurrently. The applicants were convicted in two distinct cases involving different offences committed on the same date: one case under Section 392 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, and another involving offences under Sections 353 and 324 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question was whether the court could exercise its discretion to order the sentences awarded in these separate trials to run concurrently rather than consecutively. The Federal Shariat Court, considering the submissions of both the applicants' counsel and the Assistant Advocate-General, allowed the application. The Court held that the sentences of imprisonment awarded in the two separate cases shall run concurrently. The key principle laid down is that the Court possesses the discretion under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 to direct that sentences in multiple cases against the same convict run concurrently, thereby providing an opportunity for the convicts to reform.
- Can a court order sentences in two separate criminal cases to run concurrently?
- Does the court have the discretion under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 to direct that sentences in multiple cases against the same convict run concurrently?
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 353, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 392, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 397, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
' S.A. RABBANI, J.--- The applicants Fayyaz Hussain son of Mubarak, Fayyaz Ahmed son of Muhammad Ali and Aijaz Hussain son of Syed Pir Shah, committed two different offences at different time and places on the same date i,e, 1-5-1997. F.I.R. No,151 of 1997 was lodged at Clifton Police Station Karachi South in respect of a robbery in the house of complainant BarkatuIllah and F.I.R. No,84 of 1997 was recorded at T.P.X. Police Station Karachi West about the offences under sections 353 and 324, P.P.C.
2. On 27-4-2002 the 1st Additional Sessions Judge Karachi West convicted the applicants under section 324, P.P.C. Awarding them five years' rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs,5,000 each.
Under section 353, P.P.C. They were awarded two years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs,3,000. They were given benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. In the other case, these applicants were convicted by IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi South under section 392, P.P.C., with a sentence of five years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs,5,000. This judgment was announced on 22-2-2003.
3. Through the present application, they seek an order for running sentences in the two cases concurrently. Mrs. Nasreen Zafar, learned counsel representing the applicants, submitted that the sentences awarded in the two cases may be ordered to run concurrently, under section 397, Cr.P.C.
To provide appellants, an opportunity to mend themselves. She relied upon the case of Muhammad Imran v. The State SBLR 2001 FSC 50 where in this Court ordered running of sentences in many cases against the same convict to run concurrently. Mr. Arshad Lodhi, learned Assistant Advocate-General, is also of the view that a concession, in the form of relief under section 397, Cr.P.C. May provide an opportunity to the applicants to mend themselves.
4. In view of the case-law cited above, and the contention of the learned counsel, the application is allowed. The sentences of imprisonment awarded in two cases shall run concurrently. Application stands disposed of.
Cited by 1 case
- REHMATULLAH vs THE STATE 2009 YLR 2286