GURVINDER SINGH GILL
Ranjit Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. premature release petition filed. (Para 1) |
| 2. background facts of conviction and appeals. (Para 2 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 10) |
| 3. state's arguments against the petitioner's claims. (Para 8 , 9 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. court's observations on concurrency of sentences. (Para 15 , 16 , 18 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 5. interpretation of laws regarding sentence running. (Para 19 , 31 , 33) |
| 6. legal implications of setting off detention time. (Para 32 , 42) |
| 7. final dismissal of the petition. (Para 44) |
Judgment
Mr. Gurvinder Singh Gill, J.
The petitioner Ranjit Singh, life convict, has approached this Court seeking issuance of direction/mandamus for releasing him prematurely on the basis of policy dated 8.7.1991 (Annexure P-12) of Government of Punjab, upon completion of 10 years of actual sentence and 14 years of total sentence.
2. The undisputed facts are that the petitioner stands convicted for having committed offences under Section 364 IPC and 302 IPC in a case arising out of FIR No. 47 dated 19.3.1997 under Sections 364 , 302 read with Section 34 IPC, lodged at Police Station Kotwali, District Sangrur. He alongwith co-accused Bahadur Singh was sentenced vide judgment dated 7.1.2002 passed by learn
Atul Manubhai Parekh Versus CBI
Bhagirath vs. Delhi Administration
Boucher Pierre Andre vs. Supdt. Jail, Tihar
Gopal Vinayak Godse v. State of Maharashtra
Government of A.P. v. Anne Venkateswara Rao (1977)3 SCC 298
K.C. Das versus The State (Delhi) 1979 CrLJ 362
Kartar Singh and others vs. State of Haryana
Lalrinfela vs. State of Mizoram 1982 Cr.L.J 1793
Maru Ram vs. Union of India (1981)1 SCC 107
Mofil Khan v. State of Jharkhand
Muthuramalingam & Ors. vs. State Rep. By Insp. of Police
Raghbir Singh v. State of Haryana
Ranjit Singh @ Roda vs. Union Territory of Chandigarh (1984)1 SCC 31
Sambha Ji Krishna Ji Vs. State of Maharashtra AIR 1974 SC 147
State of Karnataka v. Puttaraja
State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Ratan Singh (1976)3 SCC 470
Prior term sentences must be served before subsequent life sentence under Section 427(1) CrPC unless court directs concurrency; Section 427(2) applies only when prior sentence is life imprisonment.
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....
Point of Law : Under sub-section (2) of S.31, there cannot be a sentence exceeding 14 years.
Point of Law : While multiple sentences for imprisonment for life can be awarded for multiple murders or other offences punishable with imprisonment for life, the life sentences so awarded cannot be ....
(1) Section 31(1) Cr.P.C. vests complete discretion with Court to order sentences for two or more offences at one trial to run concurrently having regard to nature of offences and surrounding factors....
The entitlement of set off for concurrent sentences and the period of detention undergone by the convict during investigation, enquiry, or trial of the same case.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.