2026 P Cr. L J 451

2026 P Cr. L J 451

[Lahore]

Before Farooq Haider and Ch. Sultan Mahmood, JJ

MUHAMMAD GULZAR---Petitioner

Versus

The STATE and others---Respondents

Writ Petition No. 2760 of 2025, decided on 10th July, 2025.

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---

----Ss. 35, 397 & 561-A---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302(b), 324, 337-

F(iii) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, causing ghayr-

jaifah mutalahimah, common intention---Separate trials for separate

offences---Concurrent running of sentences---Scope---Accused-

petitioner was convicted and sentenced in case FIR No. 297/2001---

Accused was tried in another case FIR No. 47/2006 and was

convicted and sentenced---Report of jail authorities showed that

since sentences of the petitioner in both cases were not ordered to

run concurrently by any Trial Court as well as appellate Court,

therefore, the sentences of both the cases were calculated as

consecutive---Validity---Court could order for concurrent running of

the sentences awarded to the convict in a case or even in more

cases---Superior Courts have jurisdiction under S.561-A read with

S.35 and/or S.397, Cr.P.C., as the case may be, to order that such

multiple sentences in the same transaction/trial or in a separate and

subsequent trial run concurrently---High Court ordered that

sentences awarded to the petitioner/convict in both the said cases

would run concurrently---Petition was disposed of.

Rahib Ali v. The State 2018 SCMR 418 and Noor Muhammad and

others v. The State 2025 SCMR 540 rel.

Ch. Rab Nawaz for Petitioner.

Ms. Khalida Parveen, Additional Advocate General, Punjab for

Respondents Nos. 1 and 2.

Nemo for Respondents Nos. 3 and 4 they have already been

proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated: 9.07.2025 passd by this

Court.

Date of hearing: 10th July, 2025.

JUDGMENT

 FAROOQ HAIDER, J.---Through instant petition filed by Muhammad

Gulzar (petitioner), following prayer has been made: -

It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this petition may very

kindly be accepted and the respondent No.2 may kindly be

directed to release the petitioner by counting his conviction and

sentences concurrently in both the above mentioned cases as

per mandate of law, to meet the ends of justice.

Any other appropriate relief which this Hon'ble court deems fit and

proper may also be awarded to the petitioner.

2. Brief however necessary facts for deciding instant petition are

that Muhammad Gulzar (present petitioner hereinafter to be referred

as petitioner ) along with his co-accused namely Qasim faced trial in

case arising out of FIR No.297/2001 dated: 28.09.2001 registered under

Sections: 302, 34, 324 P.P.C at Police Station: Bhowana, District: Jhang

(hereinafter to be referred as 1st case ) and after conclusion of the

trial, petitioner was convicted and sentenced vide judgment dated:

28.09.2012 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chiniot (Camp

at District Jail, Faisalabad) as under:-

Conviction Sentence

Under Section:

302 (b) P.P.C read with

Section: 34 P.P.C

Death with payment of compensation of

Rs.2,00,000/- to be paid to the legal heirs

of the deceased under Section: 544-A

Cr.P.C.

Under Section:

324 P.P.C

read with Section: 34

P.P.C

Seven years Rigorous Imprisonment along

with fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default

thereof to further undergo Simple

Imprisonment for six months.

Under Section:

337-F(iii) P.P.C

read with Section: 34

P.P.C

Three years Rigorous Imprisonment and

liable to pay Daman Rs.25,000/- along with

compensation Rs.25,000/- and in default

thereof to further undergo Simple

Imprisonment for six months.

The petitioner challenged his aforementioned convictions recorded

and sentences awarded to him before this Court through Crl. Appeal

No.415-J/2012, which was dismissed vide judgment dated: 14.03.2017

passed by Division Bench of this Court whereby all the convictions

recorded against the petitioner by the trial court were maintained

however sentence of death awarded to the appellant under Section:

302 (b) P.P.C read with Section: 34 P.P.C was modified to Imprisonment

for Life whereas sentences awarded to him by the trial court under other offences including payment of compensation, fine, Daman and

the sentence of imprisonment in default thereof as ordered by trial

court were also maintained; all the sentences awarded to the

petitioner were ordered to run concurrently and benefit of Section:

382-B Cr.P.C. was also extended to him; in this regard, paragraph No.21

of said judgment is scanned below: -

21. Considering above, conviction of both the appellants (Gulzar

alias Jino and Qasim) in offence under section 302(b) read with

34 P.P.C for committing the murder of Falak Sher deceased are

maintainted but their sentences are altered from death to

imprisonment for life each. The compensation and sentence in

default thereof awarded by the trial court through the impugned

judgment are also maintained and upheld conviction and

sentence of both the appellants (Gulzar alias Jino and Qasim) on

other heads i.e., in offences under sections 324 and 337-F(iii),

P.P.C. read with section 34 P.P.C. are also maintained. All the

sentences of the appellants shall run concurrently. Benefit of

section 382-B Cr.P.C is given to both the appellants.

Thereafter, as per report submitted by Superintendent, Central Jail,

Faisalabad, Jail Petition No.247 of 2018 was also dismissed vide

judgment dated: 27.09.2023 passed by the Supreme Court of Pakistan.

It is relevant to mention here that after registration of

aforementioned 1st case , another case arising out of FIR No.47/2006

dated: 28.03.2006 was registered against the petitioner under Sections:

302, 324, 337-F(iii), 34 P.P.C at Police Station: Qadirpur, District: Jhang

(hereinafter to be referred as 2nd case ) wherein he was summoned by

the trial court and after conclusion of the trial, he was convicted and

sentenced vide judgment dated: 26.01.2013 passed by learned

Additional Sessions Judge, Jhang, as under:-

Conviction Sentence

Under Section:

302 (b) P.P.C

Death along with payment of compensation of

Rs.2,00,000/- to be paid to the legal heirs of the

deceased under Section: 544-A Cr.P.C. and in

default thereof to further undergo Simple

Imprisonment for six months.

Under Section:

324/34 P.P.C

Seven years Rigorous Imprisonment along

with fine of Rs.25,000/- and in default thereof

to further undergo Simple Imprisonment for

three months. Under Section:

337-F(iii)/34 P.P.C

Three years Rigorous Imprisonment and liable

to pay Daman Rs.25,000/-

Feeling aggrieved, petitioner also challenged his aforementioned

convictions and sentences before this Court through Crl. Appeal No.47-

J/2013, which was disposed of vide judgment dated: 13.10.2016 passed

by Division Bench of this Court whereby all the convictions recorded

against the petitioner by the trial court (as detailed above) were

maintained however sentence of death awarded to the appellant

under Section: 302 (b) P.P.C was modified to Imprisonment for Life

whereas sentences awarded to the petitioner by the trial court under

other offences including payment of compensation, fine, Daman and

the sentence of imprisonment in default thereof as ordered by the trial

court were also maintained; all the sentences were ordered to run

concurrently and benefit of Section: 382-B Cr.P.C. was also extended in

favour of the convict/petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that jail authorities are

not releasing the petitioner/convict by counting his all sentences

concurrently in both above-mentioned cases and prays for passing

order for running of all the sentences awarded to the convict/petitioner

by the trial court in aforementioned two separate cases/trial

concurrently instead of consecutively except the sentences in default of

payment of compensation, fine and Daman; further submits that any

petition for leave to appeal, appeal, review or petition of any other

nature regarding these both cases is currently not pending before

Supreme Court of Pakistan or any other Court. He has referred order

dated: 11.09.2024 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.37080/2023

titled as Qasim v. The State, etc. (copy whereof is available at Page

Nos.35 to 37 of instant petition).

4. Learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab fairly submits that

in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, she has no

objection on passing the order for running of the sentences awarded

to the petitioner in aforementioned both cases concurrently except the

sentences awarded to him in default of payment of compensation, fine

and Daman; in this regard, she has referred case of Rahib Ali v. The

State (2018 SCMR 418).

5. Arguments heard. Record perused.

6. On 17.01.2025, report and parawise comments to this petition

were requisitioned from jail authorities which have been received and

the same are available on the record as apprised by Additional

Registrar (Court); relevant portion of said report and parawise

comments is hereby reproduced as under: Dear Sir,

I have the honour to submit report and para-wise comments on the

above titled writ petition as under:-

REPORT

It is submitted that the Petitioner namely Gulzar @ Gulzari son of

Shahdat is currently confined in Central Jail Faisalabad. He was

admitted in the Jail on 08.12.2006. He is serving his sentence in

the following cases.

1. FIR No.297/2001 under section 302/324 p/s Bhowana is as under

He was convicted and Sentence by the Learned Court of Mr. Aqil

Hassan Chohan, Additional District and Sessions Judge, Chiniot

on 28.09.2012. The detail of sentence is as under:-

i. Under section 302(b) death sentence compensation of Rs.200000/

or 06 months S.I

ii. Under section 324 P.P.C 07 years R.I + Fine of Rs. 10000/- or 06

months S.I

iii. Under section 337-Fiii P.P.C 03 years R.I + Daman of Rs.25000/- or

06 months S.I

Upon Criminal Appeal No.415-J of 2012 the death sentence was

converted into imprisonment for life remaining sentence was

maintained. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently

in said case. The benefit of section 382-B Cr.P.C was given to the

accused by the orders of Honorable Lahore High Court Lahore

vide judgment dated 14.03.2017. His Jail Petition No. 247 of 2018

has been dismissed by the orders of the August Supreme Court

of Pakistan Islamabad vide Judgment dated 27.09.2023. He has

been served out his sentence in this case after getting the

remission of 3156 days, on 01.03.2023.

2. FIR No.47/2006 under sections 302/324/337-F(iii)/34 P.P.C P/S Qadir

Pur District Jhang.

He was also convicted and sentenced in above said case by the

Learned Court of Ch. Muhammad Hussain, Additional District

and Sessions Judge Jhang on 26.01.2013. The detail of sentence is

as under:-

i. Under section 302(b) death sentence + compensation of Rs.200000/

or 06 months S.I

ii. Under section 324 P.P.C 07 years R.I + Fine of Rs.25000/- or 03

months S.I iii. Under section 337-Fiii P.P.C 03 years R.I + Daman of Rs.25000/-

All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently in said case. The

benefit of section 382-B Cr.P.C was given to the accused.

Upon Criminal Appeal No.47-J of 2013 the death sentence was

converted into imprisonment for life, while remaining sentence

was maintained by the orders of Honorable Lahore vide

judgment dated 13.10.2016. The sentence of case FIR No. 47/2006

is commenced after expiry of sentence in case FIR No. 297/2001

i.e 01.03.2023.

Detail of served /un-served sentence and remissions earned by the

prisoner is as under:-

Sr. No. Description Y M D

Total Sentence 25 00 00

1. Substantive sentence

including undertrial period

08 00 16

2. Remission earned 05 08 00

3. Remaining sentence 11 03 14

4. Probable date of release 11.05.2036.

If compensation, fine and

Daman paid

Above mentioned sentences of the both cases were not ordered to

run concurrently by any trial court as well as any appellant

court, Hence, the sentences of both cases were calculated as

consecutive.

PARA WISE COMMENTS

1. No Comments.

2. Correct

3. Correct.

4. Partly correct. The petitioner conviction is rightfully treated as

consecutive because no competent authority i.e Learned trial

courts or appellant courts have directed that convictions in

above mentioned different FIRs to be run concurrently.

5. Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C) gives the

court power to consolidate sentences in multiple trials. As no

appellant court or trial court has used this discretion by mentioning sentences of other case to run concurrent, his

sentences were treated as consecutive by Jail authority.

6. No Comments.

7. Incorrect. All ordinary and special remissions have been granted

to the petitioner as per law due to which he has completed his

sentence in case FIR 297/2001 and his sentence in case 47/2006

has significantly been reduced. As of today, the petitioner has

earned remission of 05 year 08. months and 00 days.

8. No Comments

9. No Comments

10. No Comments

Aforementioned report clearly reveals that convict/petitioner was

admitted in the jail on 08.12.2006 and since then, he is confined

therein. It has been mentioned in said report that since sentences of

the petitioner in both cases were not ordered to run concurrently by

any trial court as well as appellate court, therefore, the sentences of

both the cases were calculated as consecutive. By now it is well settled

that this Court can order for running of the sentences awarded to the

convict in a case or even in more cases concurrently; in this regard,

guidance has been sought from above referred case of Rahib Ali v. The

State (2018 SCMR 418) and relevant portion whereof is being

reproduced below:-

17. In the light of discussion made above, there remains no doubt

that the High Court and so also this Court have jurisdiction

under section 561-A read with section 35 and or section 397,

Cr.P.C. as the case may to ordered such multiple sentences in

same transaction/trial or in a separate and subsequent trial to

run concurrently

Further guidance can also be sought from the authoritative

pronouncement on the subject in the case of Noor Muhammad and

others v. The State (2025 SCMR 540) and relevant portion of the same is

reproduced as under: -

The admitted fact of the case is that all the three FIRs are a result

of one and the same transaction. Under Section 397 Cr.P.C., the

Court has power to direct that the sentences awarded to the

petitioner in the other FIRs shall run concurrently. In Mst.

Shahista Bibi , this Court has held that the sentences of

imprisonment or that of life imprisonment awarded at the

same trial or in two different trials have to run concurrently. It

is always expected that the Courts are required to exercise its discretion in favour of the accused, especially in the cases of

minors, unless the circumstances demand otherwise, but in the

case in hand, the discretion has not been exercised, which has

caused prejudice to the rights of the accused/minor. It is a fact

that the petitioner at the time of his arrest, was minor, and is

behind the bars since 2006. He has almost served out his

substantive sentence for life, therefore, on the basis of the facts

and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is entitled for the

benefit of Section 397 Cr.P.C. Since, the learned counsel for the

petitioner does not want to pursue the matter on merits and

requested for concurrence of the sentences, we are inclined to

take a lenient view by accepting his request.

Thus, in view of the above, the convictions and sentences awarded

to the petitioner as mentioned in Paragraph No. 2 of this

judgment are maintained. However, all the sentences shall run

concurrently, with a benefit of Section 382-B Cr.P.C.

7. In view of what has been discussed above, it is ordered that

sentences awarded to the petitioner/convict in both aforementioned

cases i.e. arising out of FIR No.297/2001 dated: 28.09.2001 registered at

Police Station: Bhowana, District: Jhang and FIR No.47/2006 dated:

28.03.2006 registered at Police Station: Qadirpur, District: Jhang, would

run concurrently except sentences of imprisonment in default of

payment of compensation, fine or Daman. Benefit under Section: 382-B

Cr.P.C. in both the cases has already been granted to the petitioner.

Instant writ petition stands disposed of in above terms.

JK/M-131/L Order accordingly.