the rules framed thereunder. Combined effect of Rs. 217 and 140 of the Pakistan Prison Rules, 1878 is that ordinarily the total remissions given to someone, who has been sentenced to life imprisonment, cannot shorten the period of, sentence of a convict to less than 15 years Principles. Life imprisonment. Definition.8 Grant off emission. Accused persons convicted under Hadd or Qisas. Non-payment of compensation to the legal representatives of the deceased. Failure to seek permission of trial Court. Authorities while granting huge remission i.e. more than 18 years did not make reference to the concerned trial Court for granting remission/releasing the accused persons but granted remission and released them. Accused persons had not paid the compensation amount to the legal representatives of the deceased and Daman amount to injured complainant. Effect. Authorities were duty bound to inform the trial Court about recovery of the amount before releasing the accused persons but same was not done and accused were released straightaway which seriously prejudiced the legal representatives of deceased and injured complainant as well as caused injustice to them. Authorities ignored that not only the appeal of the accused 8. PLD 1968 Lah. 1 and (1962) All. ELR 246 ref. PLD 2006 SC 365(d). persons was pending before High Court but revision of the petitioner against the accused persons for enhancement of sentence from, life imprisonment to death was also pending. Accused persons had served only 6 years 3 months sentence and they had been granted remission for more than 18 years. Such remissions were illegal, improper and the accused persons were remanded to jail to serve out the remaining sentences. Review application was allowed in circumstances.9 Judgment passed by High Court in exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction under Art. 199 off the Constitution. Review. Maintainability. Principles. At the time of dismissal of the main petition regarding emissions granted to accused persons, proper facts and law points were not considered. Petitioner sought review of the judgment and in his review application had mentioned legal points. Validity. Remission granted by Authorities to the accused persons was challenged on legal points and. the same points were not properly brought before the High Court dismissing the Constitutional petition. Review application was maintainable 55