SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1977 Supreme(Raj) 338

M.L.SHRIMAL
Phool Singh – Appellant
Versus
The State of Rajasthan – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioners:R.N. Khandelwal, Advocate.
For the Respondent: S.B. Mathur, Public Prosecutor.

JUDGMENT

1. - This is an application under Section 482 Cr. P.C. filed by convict Phool Singh and Mishri praying that the sentences imposed upon petitioner Phool Singh in criminal case Nos. 260 of 1975, 261 of 1975, 263 of 1975, 278 of 1975, 96 of 1973 and 177 of 1973 be ordered to run concurrently. Similar request has been made for accused Mishri that the sentences awarded to him in Cr. Case No. 260 of 1975, 261 of 1975, 262 of 1975 and 263 of 1975 be ordered to run concurrently.

2. The application is not opposed by the State.

3. The question which needs determination is whether this court can in exercise of its inherent powers make the sentences awarded in the aforesaid cases to run concurrently ? Section 427 Cr P.C. provides that where several sentences are passed against the same person such sentences should ordinary run consecutively i.e one after the expiration of the other, unless the court convicting the accused directs that they should run concurrently. It does not lay down that the order about the running of the sentences concurrently with the previous sentences must form part of the subsequent judgment. Such an order can be made even after the subsequent judgment had been g










Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top