Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
SANDIPKUMAR C.MORE, ABASAHEB D.SHINDE
Vikas @ Sadhu Gendev Hagare (Mali) – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra, Through Under Secretary, Home Department – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, J.
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally at the admission stage with the consent of the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned APP for the respondent–State.
2. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the Additional Sessions Judge, Osmanabad, to correct or modify the judgment and order dated 15/02/2012 passed in Sessions Case No. 8 of 2012, to the extent of granting him set-off under Section 428 of the Cr.P.C. for the period of imprisonment already undergone by him from the date of his arrest till the decision of the aforesaid case.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Osmanabad, convicted the petitioner, who is the original accused No. 1 in Sessions Case No. 8 of 2011, for offences punishable under Sections 302 and 323 of the IPC. However, while awarding the sentence, though the learned Additional Sessions Judge directed that the sentences imposed under the aforesaid sections of the IPC shall run concurrently, no order granting set-off under Section 428 of the Cr.P.C. was passed. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits th
High Court under Article 226 can direct mandatory set-off of undertrial detention under Section 428 Cr.P.C. for life convicts, even if omitted by trial court, as it is non-discretionary statutory rig....
The entitlement of set off for concurrent sentences and the period of detention undergone by the convict during investigation, enquiry, or trial of the same case.
Section 427 provides that when a person already undergoing a sentence of imprisonment is sentenced on a subsequent conviction to imprisonment or imprisonment for life, such imprisonment or imprisonme....
The High Court has the authority to direct sentences from separate convictions to run concurrently under Section 427 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, ensuring fair treatment in sentencing.
A convicted prisoner cannot claim set-off for remand periods in subsequent cases while serving a sentence.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the pre-conviction period of detention, even if in the nature of 'simple imprisonment', is liable to be set-off against a sentence of 'rigorou....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
