Case Details

Citation(s)
2007 SLG 1421 2007 SLD 1421 2007 SCMR 1424
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No.52 of 2001, decision dated: 26th.April, 2007
RANA BHAGWANDAS, ACTG. C.J. TASSADUQ HUSSAIN, JILLANI AND NASIR-UL-MULK, JJ
Muhammad Zaman Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellants. Mehmood Raza, Additional Advocate-General Balochistan for the State

AHMED SULTAN and another

VS

THE STATE

Law:

Section:

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302/34---Constitution of. Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)---High Court had refused to order the sentences of imprisonment for life awarded to accused in the two cases to run concurrently---Question of directing the said sentences to run concurrently required examination by Supreme Court keeping in view the principles laid down by Supreme Court---Leave to appeal was granted to examine the case of accused thoroughly in the light of cases decided by Supreme Court. Javed Sheikh v. The State 1985 SCMR 153; Muhammad Ramzan v. The State 1989 SCMR 1405; Bashir and 3 others v. The State PLD 1991 SC 1145 and Bhai Khan v. The State PLD 1992 SC 14 ref. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302/34---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.397-Request for direction for sentences to run concurrently, refusal of---Motive for the three murders according to the confessional statements of the accused was the same and the crime was committed also on the same day; but one deceased was murdered by strangulation at a place different than the one where other two deceased were murdered also by strangulation---Incident had taken place within the limits of two different police stations---Accused, therefore, were tried in the two cases separately, though the judgment was announced on the same day---Sentences of imprisonment of a person convicted for offences in different cases, as provided by S.397, Cr.P.C. were to run consecutively, but discretion was left with the Trial Court to order the concurrent running of the sentences of imprisonment in separate cases---Unless such discretion was exercised in favour of accused, the sentences would run consecutively---Neither the Trial Court nor the High Court or even the Supreme Court in the petitions for leave to appeal had exercised the said discretion in favour of the accused persons; even otherwise, on merits too, keeping in view the gruesome murders of three persons for a petty object committed by the accused, such discretion of directing the sentences to run concurrently was not exercised in their favour---Appeal was dismissed by Supreme Court accordingly. Javed Sheikh v. The State 1985 SCMR 153; Muhammad…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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