LAHORE: Confusion continues among various state institutions regarding whether the period of under-trial detention in cases involving multiple consecutive sentences should be credited separately for each sentence or treated as a single adjustment period.
The issue arose before the Lahore High Court’s Multan Bench in the case of convict Saghir Hussain, who claimed he had completed his 100-year prison sentence after accumulating over 59 years in ordinary and special remissions. However, bureaucratic delays and what he referred to as “flawed legal advice” have prevented his release.
Saghir was initially sentenced to death on three counts under Section 302/34 of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC), along with life imprisonment under Section 460 PPC. His appeals were dismissed by the Lahore High Court, and he later approached the Supreme Court not to challenge his conviction, but to request a reduction in his sentence.
The Supreme Court converted his death sentences into life sentences on three counts under Section 302/34 PPC. He subsequently filed a miscellaneous application requesting that his life sentences be served concurrently. However, the Supreme Court rejected the request, clarifying that the three life sentences would run consecutively.
As a result, his total sentence was calculated as 75 years under Section 302/34 PPC and 25 years under Section 460 PPC, in accordance with Section 57 of the PPC, which treats life imprisonment as 25 years for sentence calculations.
Despite the remission system under the Pakistan Prisons Rules, 1978, benefiting him with more than 59 years in remissions, Saghir still has approximately 4.5 years left to serve.
