Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C. JAYACHANDRAN, J
B.Ajai S/o K.Babu – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala – Respondent
ORDER :
Dated, this the 17th day of February, 2025 The petitioner herein is the 8th accused, who has been convicted in C.C.No.343/2015 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Mavelikkara for the offences under Sections 143 , 147, 148, 452, 324, 506(ii) and 109, read with Section 149 of the Penal Code and Section 27(1) of the Arms Act .
2. Annexure-A3 is the judgment. Petitioner was previously convicted in another case by the learned Special Judge, N.D.P.S, New Delhi in a case arising from F.I.R. No.4/2015 of the Special Cell. In that case, he was convicted to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years and fine of ₹ 1 lakh. The judgment is produced at Annexure-A5. The grievance of the petitioner is that though the factum of previous conviction was brought to the notice of learned Magistrate - as could be seen from Annexure-A3 – still, the benevolent provision of Section 427 has not been invoked by the learned Magistrate. According to the learned counsel, the same is a mistake committed by the Magistrate, which is liable to be corrected. Learned counsel would point out that the Magistrate should have invoked Section 427 Cr.P.C suo moto and failure to do so, can
Consecutive sentences are standard unless a court explicitly directs otherwise; offenses must be distinct for concurrent sentencing to apply.
The court can exercise discretion under Section 427 Cr.P.C. to order concurrent sentences when justice requires, especially if the offender has served a significant portion of their sentence.
The court clarified that unless explicitly ordered, sentences from multiple convictions run consecutively under Section 427 of Cr.P.C., accommodating set-off for time served, emphasizing the legislat....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that when there is a sentence of life imprisonment, both sentences should run concurrently as per sec. 427(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The court affirmed that under Section 427 CrPC, sentences for multiple convictions may run concurrently unless compelling reasons dictate otherwise.
The court may exercise discretion under Section 427 Cr.P.C. to allow concurrent sentences to meet the ends of justice, while default sentences for non-payment of fines must run consecutively.
The court may direct sentences to run concurrently under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., considering the nature of offenses and the defendant's likelihood of reform.
Concurrent sentences under Section 427 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can only be granted when the offenses arise from a single transaction; distinct and independent offenses do not qualify for su....
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
