October 01, 2026
HASHIR AHSAN
ISLAMABAD
A bench comprising Justice Rozi Khan Baraich and Justice Syed Arshad Hussain Shah at the Federal Constitutional Court (Quetta Registry) issued its detailed order on the petition titled Soba Khan v. Superintendent Central Jail Mach, filed under Article 175(f)(c) of the Constitution of Pakistan.
In the judgment, the Federal Constitutional Court comprehensively covered all legal options regarding remissions in prisoners’ sentences, clarifying that under Section 2(5) of the Prisons Act 1894, the Pakistan Prison Rules 1978, and Article 45 of the Constitution, there are three primary sources of remissions, including constitutional, statutory, and administrative remissions.
The court interpreted that Ordinary remission is granted under Chapter XVIII of the Prison Rules for a prisoner’s continuous good behavior in jail, hard labor, educational examinations (Rule 215), and correctional activities.
Special remission is granted on national days, religious festivals, or by the Federal and Provincial Governments, as well as under the President’s constitutional powers under Article 45 and Sections 401 and 402 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). Under Section 57 of the Pakistan Penal Code, life imprisonment is deemed equivalent to 25 years for calculating fractions of sentences, and under Rule 217(i) of the Prison Rules, total ordinary and special remissions combined cannot exceed one-third of the substantive sentence (except for remissions earned through blood donations under Rule 212, surgical sterilization under Rule 213, and educational examinations under Rule 215).
The court emphasized that under Rules 140 and 217(ii) of the Prison Rules 1978, there is a mandatory legal requirement for a life convict that, despite all possible remissions, the duration of their substantive imprisonment cannot under any circumstances be reduced below 15 years, so that the deterrent and compensatory nature of the sentence is maintained.
According to the judicial decision, the prisoner was granted illegal and excessive remissions contrary to the Pakistan Prison Rules 1978. As per the nominal roll submitted on August 17, 2023, Soba Khan had served only 9 years, 4 months, and 19 days in prison while being granted 15 years, 7 months, and 18 days in ordinary and special remissions, leaving his remaining sentence at just 5 months and 23 days (including the payment of fine). In its comprehensive decision, the High Court declared all illegal remissions null and void and ordered their immediate withdrawal, directed prisoners to serve at least two-thirds of their sentence in accordance with Rule 217 of the Prison Rules, ordered the IG Prisons to re-evaluate the B-Class facilities for all prisoners, declared the issuance of nominal rolls for premature release without verification of eligibility as arbitrary, discriminatory, and contrary to Articles 4, 9, and 25 of the Constitution, directed adherence to Islamic injunctions and superior judiciary principles in Qisas and Diyat cases, and ordered disciplinary proceedings against the officials who granted illegal remissions.
Background
According to the written judgment issued following the hearing held on July 08, 2026, the petition was filed against the joint decision of the Balochistan High Court Quetta dated May 31, 2025. The core legal question before the court was the legal and constitutional status of remissions in sentences granted by jail authorities under the supervision of the Inspector General of Prisons and administrative control of the Provincial Home Department, as well as the preparation and issuance of nominal rolls.
The petitioner Soba Khan was sentenced by the Additional Sessions Judge Loralai on May 26, 2015, under Section 302(2) of the Pakistan Penal Code to imprisonment for life, a fine of two hundred thousand rupees, and six months of simple imprisonment in default of payment, while also being granted the benefit of Section 382(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a decision that was upheld up to the Supreme Court.
However, while confined in Central Jail Mach, Soba Khan was granted ordinary and, in particular, special remissions various times.
The Court held that Soba Khan served only 9 years, 4 months, and 19 days in jail, while by granting an extraordinary remission of 15 years, 7 months, and 18 days, his imprisonment was unlawfully reduced to less than 15 years in violation of express provisions of the Prison Rules, which creates no legal right; therefore, finding no merit in Soba Khan’s petition, the court dismissed it.