The Supreme Court has ruled that any subsequent enhancement of a convict’s sentence after the president has exercised the constitutional power to remit or reduce it requires a clear legal basis.
In dismissing an appeal seeking to convert the life imprisonment of convict Tahreen Ilyas into the death penalty, the court noted that he had already completed his sentence and been released. The Superintendent of Jail, Zhob, Balochistan, appeared before the court via video link during the hearing.
The bench questioned him about a report stating that the convict had served 14 years in prison before being granted remission under a presidential general remission. It noted Supreme Court precedents required at least 17 years for life convicts and asked how a second punishment could be imposed under Section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code after the original sentence had been executed.
The court also remarked that the Constitution empowers the president to remit or reduce sentences, which has already been exercised. It observed that any attempt to enhance a sentence post-remission would require a constitutional amendment.