ABDUL HAMEED BALOCH, J.---Through this application the applicant Muhammad Siddique alias Qurban has prayed that three years' sentence awarded to him in the case FIR No. 179 of 2015, Police Station Dera Allah Yar be ordered to run concurrently with the one-year sentence awarded to him in the case FIR No.181 of 2015, Police Station Dera Allah Yar.
2. The background of the instant application is that in pursuance of case FIR No.17 9/2015, the applicant along with his companion was chased by the police, whereupon the applicant made firing upon the police but he was apprehended, and a TT Pistol along with magazine was recovered from his possession for which he failed to produce any license or permit, as such a separate FIR No.181 of 2015 was also lodged against the applicant.
3. After full dressed trial in both the referred FIRs, the learned Judicial Magistrate Sohbat Pur (trial court) convicted and sentenced the applicant as under:
1. In case FIR No. 179/2015, under sectio ns 392, 34, P.P.C. for a period of three years' R.I with fine of Rs.20000/- or two months' SI.
2. In case FIR No.181 of 2015, under section 13-E of the Arms Ordinance for a period of one-year's RI with fine of Rs.5000/- or two months' SI.
The Applicant appealed the above convic tions and sentences before the learned Sessions Judge Dera Allah Yar (appellate Court), but the appellate court dismissed both the appeals, thereafter the applicant preferred Criminal Revision Petitions Nos. (s) 28 and 29 of 2019 before this court but both the petitions were dismissed. Hence this application.
4. We have heard the learned Additional P.G. and have examined the record. Perusal of record reveals that both the sentences are having independent footings, therefore it would be appropriate to reproduce section 397, Cr .P.C.
[397. Sentence on offender already sentenced for another offence. When a person already undergoing a sentence of imprisonment or imprisonment .for life is sentenced to imprisonment, or imprisonment for life, such imprisonment, or imprisonment for life shall commence at the expiration of the imprisonment, or imprisonment for life to which he has been previously sentenced, unless the Court directs that the subsequent sentence shall run concurrently with such previous sentence: Provided that where a person who has been sentenced to imprisonment by an order under section 123 in default of furnishing security is, whilst undergoing such sentence, sentenced to imprisonment for an offence committed prior to the making of such order , the latter sentence shall commence immediately .]
5. This court in terms of section 561-A has inherent power to order the sentence of different transaction to be run concurrently . Reliance can be placed on the case of Mukhtar Ahmed v. State PLD 2011 Lahore 29, whereby it has been held as under:
6. The sentences albeit having an independent footing with all strength of law, however , these pertain to one and the same person i.e. petitioner . No doubt the intent of legislature to insert and confine the word "concurrent" in Code of Criminal Procedure holds much significance with analogy drawn from section 403, Cr. P. C. As per section 397, Cr.P.C. read with section 35(2) (a), Cr. P. C, this Court is empowered to order different sentences inflicted upon one accused to run concurrently . Guidance in this regard is sought from the dictates of law of august Supreme Court of Pakistan in the cases of Javed Sheikh v. The State (1985 SCMR 153) and Muhammad Ittefaq v.
The State ( 1986 SCMR 1627 ).
7. In view of above referred dictates of law of august Supreme Court of Pakistan, the instant constitutional petition is accepted as a consequence whereof relief sought for in the prayer clause is granted.
In view of above the application is accepted. The sentences of D the applicant in case FIR No.179 of 2015 and in case FIR No. 181 of 2015, respectively lodged with Police Station Dera Allah Yar are directed to be run concurrently .