T. S. THAKUR, FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA, A. K. SIKRI, S. A. BOBDE, R. BANUMATHI
MUTHURAMALINGAM – Appellant
Versus
STATE REP. BY INSP. OF POLICE – Respondent
Multiple sentences of imprisonment for life may be awarded for multiple murders or other offences punishable with life imprisonment, but such life sentences cannot be directed to run consecutively. (!) (!) (!) (!)
Life imprisonment means imprisonment for the remainder of the convict's life, unless commuted or remitted by competent authority; directing a convict to undergo life imprisonment twice over is anomalous and irrational, as humans have only one life. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!)
Under Section 31(1) CrPC, for convictions of several offences at one trial, sentences comprising imprisonment generally run consecutively unless the court directs otherwise; however, life sentences must run concurrently (or be superimposed over each other). (!) (!) (!) (!) (!)
If multiple life sentences are awarded, they superimpose on each other; remission or commutation granted for one does not automatically extend to others. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!)
Term sentences (fixed-term imprisonment) and life imprisonment may run consecutively if the term sentence is ordered to commence first; conversely, if life sentence starts first, the term sentence runs concurrently. (!) (!)
Section 31(2) CrPC and its proviso apply to cases where aggregate consecutive sentences exceed the court's competence for a single offence (limiting to 14 years max, not exceeding twice single-offence punishment); it does not apply to Sessions Courts (which have full sentencing power) or prohibit consecutive life sentences. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!)
Court's discretion under Section 31 CrPC to direct concurrent or consecutive sentences must align with the principle that life imprisonment consumes the remainder of life. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!)
JUDGMENT :
T.S. THAKUR, CJI.
1. A Bench comprising three-Judges of this Court has referred to us the following short but interesting question:
“Whether consecutive life sentences can be awarded to a convict on being found guilty of a series of murders for which he has been tried in a single trial?.”
2. The question arises in the following circumstances:
3. The appellants were tried for several offences including an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, “the IPC”) for several murders allegedly committed by them in a single incident. They were found guilty and sentenced to suffer varying sentences, including a sentence of imprisonment for life for each one of the murders committed by them. What is important is that the sentence of imprisonment for life for each one of the murders was directed to run consecutively. The result was that the appellants were to undergo consecutive life sentences ranging between two to eight such sentences depending upon the number of murders committed by them. Criminal appeals preferred against the conviction and the award of consecutive life sentences having failed, the appellants have filed the present appeals to ass
O.M. Cherian @ Thankachan v. State of Kerala
Duryodhan Rout v. State of Orissa
Kamalanantha v. State of Tamil Nadu
Sanaullah Khan v. State of Bihar
Gopal Vinayak Godse v. State of Maharashtra
Dalabir Singh v. State of Punjab
Ashok Kumar @ Golu v. Union of India
Laxman Naskar v. Union of India
Shri Bhagwan v. State of Rajasthan
Swamy Shraddananda v. State of Karnataka
Ranjit Singh v. Union Territory of Chandigarh
Manoj @ Panu v. State of Haryana
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.