Pakistan Case Law
2016 PCrLJ 1735

QAMAR-UD-DIN BUTT Versus HOME SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB Nadeem Shibli

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation2016 PCrLJ 1735
CourtLahore High Court
Case No.W. P. No.2886 of 2016
Date2016-07-28
Judge(s)Syed Muhammad Kazim Raza Shamsi and Ali Baqar Najafi
ResultPetition allowed
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

Through this constitutional petition, the petitioner sought his release from jail, having served his substantive sentence of twenty-five years' rigorous imprisonment awarded under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, but remaining confined due to the non-payment of a fine of Rs. 5,00,000/-. The core legal question concerned whether the High Court could reduce a fine imposed as part of a sentence to secure the liberty of a convict who had already served the substantive term and was unable to pay the fine while incarcerated. The Lahore High Court held that the liberty of an individual is of prime importance and that a convict's continued detention solely due to inability to pay a fine warrants intervention. The court thus reduced the fine to Rs. 50,000/- with an alternate sentence of two months' simple imprisonment, and upon noting that the petitioner had already undergone the requisite period in default, ordered his immediate release.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Can the High Court reduce a fine imposed upon a convict whose sentence has been maintained up to the Supreme Court?
  • Whether a convict can be kept incarcerated solely due to the non-payment of a fine when the substantive sentence has been fully served?
  • Does the High Court have the power to order the immediate release of a prisoner who has served the default sentence imposed in lieu of a fine?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Section 9(c), Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
  • Section 15, Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997
  • Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
constitutional petitionrelease on parolenon-payment of finesubstantive sentenceliberty of an individualreduction of finedefault sentence

ORDER

Through this constitutional petition the petitioner has sought his release on parole on the ground that he was convicted, in case FIR No.28 dated 04.09.2003 under sections 9(c)/15, Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 registered at Police Station ANF, Lahore by Judge, Special Court, C.N.S., Lahore vide judgment dated 29.08.2005 and sentenced to 25 years' R.I. with fine of Rs.5,00,000/- and in default whereof to further undergo 1 year's S.I. besides extending the benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C.

2. As per the report submitted by Superintendent, Central Jail, Faislabad the petitioner was to be released on 09.11.2016, but still he is behind the bars as the fine of Rs.5,00,000/- has not been paid.

3. Release of the petitioner sought through this petition is opposed by the learned law officer appearing on behalf of the State.

4. Arguments heard. File perused.

5. It is not denied that petitioner has served out his entire sentence but could not be released on account of non-payment of fine of Rs.5,00,000/-. In the report and parawise comments submitted by respondent No.1/Home Secretary, release of the petitioner on parole had already been denied. However, while going through the file we have noticed that petitioner is confined in the jail just because he could not pay the fine of Rs.5,00,000/-. As per said report dated 15.10.2015, probable date of release of the petitioner is 09.11.2016 if fine is paid and according to the learned counsel for the petitioner based on the said calculation the petitioner was required to be released before two months from now.

6. The imposition of the fine to the convict is a sole discretion of the court, regulated by the facts and circumstances of the case. The fine has been maintained up to the level of Supreme Court when Jail Petitions Nos.202 of 2008 and 309-L of 2008 filed by the petitioner was dismissed but said fact may not debar this court to reduce the fine. The liberty of an individual is of prime importance for this Court and just because of non-payment of fine, which he could not arrange while living in the jail, his liberty cannot be curtailed.

7. For what has been discussed above, we dispose of this petition while reducing the fine of Rs.5,00,000/ to Rs.50,000/- and in alternate to spend two months' S.I. As we have been informed that petitioner has already spent two months in default of the fine, therefore, he shall be immediately released from the jail, if not required in any other criminal case.

MWA/Q-8/L Petition allowed.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.