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.

ORDER :

This Criminal Original petition has been filed to direct the sentences passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.1, Dindigul in C.C. No. 521 of 2021, dated 16.08.2023, C.C. No. 522 of 2021, dated 16.08.2023 and C.C. No. 496 of 2021 dated 16.08.2023, to run concurrently along with the sentence passed C.C No.494 of 2021, dated 16.08.2023.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent and perused the materials available on record.

3. The contention of the petitioner is that he has involved in four cases in Cr.Nos.441, 442, 443 and 445 of 2021 on the file of respondent Police for the offence punishable under Section 379 IPC. After completion of investigation, the respondent police has filed a final report and the same was taken on file as C.C.Nos.494, 496, 521 and 522 of 2021 on the file of Judicial Magistrate No.I, Dindigul. It is the case of prosecution that the petitioner has indulged in theft of two wheelers. After completion of trial, the learned Magistrate has convicted the petitioner for a period of one year simple imprisonment and to set off the earlier period of incarceration vide judgment, dated 16.03.2023. Before passing of judgment, the petitioner has already undergone incarceration for a period of 200 days and after pronouncement of judgment, the petitioner has undergone incarceration as a convict prisoner more than a year. When he enquired the same, the prison authorities informed him that though the judgment was delivered in all the four cases on the same day, there is no specific order to run the sentence period concurrently. Therefore, sentence period has to be undergone separately in all the four cases.

4.The learned counsel further submitted that Section 427 of Cr.P.C., which is correspondent to Section 467 of BNSS states that “sentence on offender sentenced for another offence” and it defines as 467(1) when a person already undergoing a sentence of imprisonment is sentenced on a subsequent conviction to imprisonment or imprisonment for life, such imprisonment or imprisonment for life shall commence at the expiration of the imprisonment to which he has been previously sentenced, unless the Court directs that the subsequent sentenced run concurrently with such previous sentenced. The above proviso would clearly speaks about the inherent power of the Court to direct that the subsequent sentence shall run concurrently.

5.In this case, the learned Magistrate has convicted and sentenced the petitioner in the four cases in the following manner:

6.The learned counsel for the petitioner further relied upon the decision of this Court in Murugan @ Panni Murugan Vs State in Crl.O.P(MD) No.4142 of 2022 vide order, dated 06.04.2022, in which, it is held that this Court has inherent power to exercise its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Cr.P.C and issued direction that the sentence imposed by the trial Court to run concurrently. Further, the petitioner had also referred the order passed by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.16329 of 2023, dated 17.08.2023, wherein, this Court had extended the benefit of