Law:

Section:

Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)-- ----Ss. 35, 382, 397 & 561-A--Pakistan Penal Code, (XLV of 1860), Ss. 57 & 365-A--Anti Terrorism Act, (XXVII of 1997), S. 7--Inherent Jurisdiction of High Court--Pakistan Prison Rules, 1978, R. 140--Consolidation of multiple sentences, whether permissible--Concurrent running of sentences awarded by two different Courts in different set of proceedings--Petitioner/convict filed an application before High Court for computing two conviction sentences awarded in two different set of proceedings by two different Courts to run concurrently--High Court dismissed application.--Challenge to--Petitioner contended that ordinarily Courts order running of two separate convictions recorded in two different set of trials by two different Courts to run concurrently, irrespective whether such conviction has been maintained, enhanced or modified by appellate or revisional Court--Validity--When an offender is saving out a substantive sentence of imprisonment is also subsequently convicted for any other offence(s) in another trial(s), per Section 397, Cr.P.C., later sentence(s) for imprisonment would generally commence at expiration of earlier sentence(s) or putting it in other words, sentences in several trial awarded to an offender in successive trials would run back to back one after expiration of other, unless Court directs that subsequent sentence shall run concurrently with sentence passed in earlier trial--Exception to this rule is in where offender is serving out sentence of imprisonment in lieu or in default of payment of fine--Neither trial nor appellate or revisional Courts have any jurisdiction to order consolidation of multiple sentences in lieu of fine--Multiple sentences or fine in a trial in lieu of fine in same or different cases would run successively--In cases, where subsequent conviction and sentence handed down by trial Court and for that matter appellate and or revisional Court, is silent as to consolidation of two or more sentences or otherwise against a convict already undergoing a sentence, than in appropriate cases, inherent jurisdiction of high Court could always be invoked--Where a convict is undergoing…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492