Lahore:
Significant confusion continues to continue among various state institutions on whether the period of detention during the trial in cases involving several consecutive sentences must be credited separately for each sentence or treated as a single adjustment period.
The question emerged for Lahore High Court’s Multan bench in the event of convicted Saghir Hussain, who claimed to have completed his 100-year prison sentence after securing over 59 years in ordinary and special remissions.
However, bureaucratic delays and what he called “defective legal advice” remains major obstacles to prevent his release.
Saghir was originally sentenced to death of three counts in accordance with ยง 302/34 of Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) together with life -long imprisonment in accordance with section 460 ppc.
His appeals were rejected by Lahore High Court, after which he approached the Supreme Court, not to contest his conviction, but to request a reduction in judgment.
The Apex Court converted its death penalty to life judge on three counts in accordance with section 302/34 ppc.
Later he filed a various application before the Supreme Court, where he requested that his life judge be required to run simultaneously. However, the court rejected the placement and clarified that the three life judges would run continuously.
Therefore, his cumulative judgment was calculated as 75 years in accordance with section 302/34 PPC and 25 years in accordance with section 460 ppc, in line with section 57 of PPC, which corresponds to life -long imprisonment with 25 years for judgment.
Although the introduction of the remission system through Pakistan Prisons Rules, in 1978, benefited the petitioner by allowing him to earn more than 59 years in remissions, he still has about 4.5 years left to earn.
