By filing instant petition under section 561-A read with sections 35 and 397, Cr.P.C., petitioner being condemned has prayed that sentences imposed upon him vide judgment dated 9-7-2001 under sections 109/302, P.P.C. And section 7 of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 may be ordered to run concurrently/simultaneously and the jail authorities may also be directed to reckon the quantum of sentences in all the offence at once/concurrently instead of consecutively.
2. Learned counsel upon this has relied upon case titled AURANGZEB AND 2 OTHERS v. THE STATE (PLD 2011 Lahore 25), case titled Mst. ZUBAIDA v. FALAK SHER and others (2007 SCMR 548), case titled SHAH HUSSAIN v. THE STATE (PLD 2009 SC 560 (FB).
3. Learned DPG has not been ale to rebut the arguments but has candidly conceded the instant point of law relying upon the Full Court judgment titled Shah Hussain v. The State.
4. Hearkened and record perused.
5. Petitioner was convicted and sentenced by the learned trial Court vide order dated 9-7-2001, his appeal was dismissed by this court vide judgment dated 15-5-2002 and then he could not succeed in obtaining any relief from the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan, ultimately, he withdrew his appeal from there on 31-10-2002. Petitioner was granted the benefit of provisions of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. But nowhere in the judgments handed down by the learned trial Court, by this court as well as by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan, it was directed that the certitude of the sentences shall run concurrently/simultaneously. The codified law is very much clear upon it and the case law referred to supra and relied upon has explicitly provided the benefit to the accused that his sentences should run concurrently. In these circumstances, by accepting the instant petition, jail authorities are directed to count the -quantum of sentence in each offence concurrently/simultaneously with the benefit of provisions of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Which has already been granted to the petitioner.