Back
ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Bhoor Singh Kharwal – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Petitioner has preferred this Criminal Misc. Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer that the sentences awarded to the petitioner in three cases (Annexure-1 to Annexure-3 of the misc. petition) may be ordered to run concurrently.
2. It is contended by counsel for the petitioner that petitioner stands convicted and sentenced in three cases, the details whereof are produced herein-below:
| S. No. | Case Detail | Judgment | Punishment |
| 1. | Criminal Regular Case No. 174/2014 (CIS No. 2939/2014) | Judgment dated 05.08.2022, passed by Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Gangapur City, District Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan | For offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act- simple imprisonment for six months and fine of Rs. 4,00,000/-, in default of payment of fine further 15 days additional simple imprisonment |
| 2. | Criminal Regular Case No. 175/2014 (CIS No. 2944/2014) | Judgment dated 09.05.2023, passed by Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Gangapur City, District Sawai Madhopur, Rajasthan | For offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act- simple imprisonment for six months and fine of Rs. 6 |
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 affirmed that under Section 427 CrPC, sentences for multiple convictions may run concurrently unless compelling reasons dictate otherwise.
The court established that discretion under Section 427 Cr.P.C. can be exercised to allow concurrent sentences to prevent injustice.
The court applied section 427 Cr.P.C. and relevant Supreme Court precedents to allow concurrent running of substantive sentences for multiple convictions under section 138 of the N.I. Act, considerin....
The court upheld the legislative intent of section 427 Cr.P.C. and relevant precedents to allow concurrent running of substantive sentences to prevent prolonged imprisonment.
The court can exercise discretion under Section 427 CrPC to allow concurrent sentences to prevent excessive punishment and ensure justice.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that concurrent sentencing under Section 427 of the Cr.P.C. is not applicable when the convictions arise from different transactions.
As per Section 427 Code of Criminal Procedure, in normal course a person already undergoing a sentence of imprisonment, if sentenced on a subsequent conviction to imprisonment, such imprisonment comm....
provisions of section 427 of the CrPC do not permit a direction for concurrent running of substantive sentences with the sentences awarded in default of payment of fine/compensation
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
