Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G. Jayachandran, J.
C. Krishnaveni – Petitioner
Versus
Inspector of Police, Chennai – Respondent
Crl. M.P. SR. No. 61481 in Crl. A. No. 547 of 2011 & Crl. M.P. SR. No. 61482 in Crl. A. No. 210 of 2011
Decided On : 23-01-2020
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 427/31 - NDPS Act - Section 31 - Notorious drug trafficker- Accused - These two miscellaneous petitions are filed by one aged about years presently in Central Prison for Women Puzzle Chennai convicted in two criminal cases arising Act - In these two petitions she seeks for direction to effect that sentences as modified in respective appeals should run concurrently – Held, Being special Act being enacted to eradicate menace of drug abuse and trafficking mandates Courts section Act to impose enhanced sentence for repeat offenders - Whereas Section Code speaks about discretion vest with Court which renders subsequent judgment to direct subsequent sentence shall run concurrently - Section Act and Section mutually exclusive – Therefore as far as offences Act light section Code gets implicitly excluded – Likewise Section Code also cannot be invoked to direct subsequent sentence to run concurrently with previous sentence since inherent power of High court section of Code can be exercised only following three circumstances to give effect to any order code to prevent abuse of process of any court and to secure ends of justice - Maharashtra Honble Supreme Court has that following principles would govern exercise of inherent jurisdiction High Court given by section Code - Vest discretion to Court hearing subsequent case of same accused whether sentence in subsequent case should run concurrently or consecutively - If Court in its wisdom think fit may direct subsequent sentence shall run concurrently with previous sentence – Contrarily Section Act prescribes enhanced sentence for subsequent offence - Any attempt to apply section an offender Act will amount to eclipse section Act and defeat intention of legislation – Petitions dismissed
ORDER :
(Prayer in Crl.M.P.SR.No.61481 of 2011: This Petition is filed under Section 427 (1) r/w 31(1) of Cr.P.C., to direct the sentences imposed through judgment in Crl.A.No.547 of 2011 dated 16.04.2019 on the file of this Court to run concurrently along with sentence imposed through judgment in Crl.A.No.210 of 2011 dated 10.04.2019 on the file of this Court.
Crl.M.P.SR.No.61482 of 2011:- This Petition is filed under Section 427 (1) r/w 31(1) of Cr.P.C., to direct the sentences imposed through judgment dated 10.04.2019 in Crl.A.No.210 of 2011 to run concurrently along with sentence imposed through judgment in Crl.A.No.547 of 2011 dated 16.04.2019 on the file of this Court.)
1. These two miscellaneous petitions are filed by one C.Krishnaveni aged about 85 years, presently in the Central Prison for Women, Puzal, Chennai convicted in two criminal cases arising under NDPS Act. In these two petitions, she seeks for a direction to the effect that the sentences as modified in the respective appeals should run concurrently.
2. The necessary details of the two cases, in which, she is now undergoing sentence is tabulated as under:
| Cr.No/offence | 745 of 2005: (03/07/2005) Possession of 2.500 Kg Ganja. | 863/2004 : (22/10/2004) Possession of 2.320 kg Ganja. |
| Section 8 (c) r/w 20(b)(ii) (B) of NDPS Act. | Section 8 (c) r/w 20(b)(ii) (B) of NDPS Act | |
| Trial Court | S.C 148/2005 | S.C 102/2005 |
| Judgment Date and sentence | 25/08/20115 years RI: | 15/03/20113 years RI: |
| Fine Rs. 1,00,000/- i/d 6 months RI | Fine Rs. 25,000/- i/d 6 months RI | |
| High Court | Crl.A.No.547/2011 | Crl.A.No.210/2011 |
| Judgment Date and Sentence | 16/04/2019 Modified to 2 years RI; | 10/04/2019 Modified to 18 months RI. |
| No change in the fine amount and default sentence. | No change in the fine amount and default sentence. |
3. In the affidavit filed in support of these petitions, the convict/ petitioner states that she is 85 years old and since 09/04/2019, she is in prison. Unless this Court directs, both the sentences imposed on her through judgment in Crl.A.No.210/2011 and Crl.A.No.547/2011 to run concurrently, very serious prejudice will be caused to her. Especially in the circumstances, wherein, she is old and suffering from all old aged related illnesses.
4. The Registry found that the prayer in these petitions are not maintainable, hence, returned. The Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has made endorsement stating that, these petitions are maintainable under section 427(1) CrPC r/w Section 31 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, the petitioners are listed before this Court under the caption “for Maintainability”.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is 85 years old lady and one foot in the grave. She suffers all ailments. Since 09/04/2019, she is in prison. The period of sentence as modified in these two appeals if run consecutively, it will take 3 ½ years. The petitioner may not survive to complete the sentence imposed on her. To facilitate her to die peacefully, this Court can exercise its inherent power and direct the sentence imposed in previous case and subsequent case to run concurrently.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that the petitions are maintainable in view of section 427 (1) r/w 31 (1) of Cr.P.C. Further, the learned counsel also submitted that, such direction can be issued even after the pronouncement of judgment and it will not amount to reviewing the judgments. The inherent power of the High Court under section 482 Cr.P.C is unfettered and section 32 A of the NDPS Act will not attract.
7. The learned counsel for the petitioner in support of the above submission, would rely upon the following judgments:
(i) A.S.Naidu –vs- The State of Madhya Pradesh (1975 Crl.L J 498);
(ii) Sher Singh –vs- State of Madhya Pradesh (1989 Crl.L J 632) and
(iii) Mohan Bhanudas Mohite –vs-
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
