K. N. Seth, J. :- The basic question involved in the applications referred to this Bench are :

1. Whether it is open to the Judge who decided an appeal to pass an order under Section 397(1), Code of Criminal Procedure after he has delivered the judgment or he will be debarred from doing so because the order will amount to an alteration of the sentence already imposed ?

2. Whether it would be competent for the High Court in exercise of its power under Section 561-A, Code of Criminal Procedure to direct that the sentence of a subsequent conviction to imprisonment shall run concurrently with the previous sentence if the stage for exercise of the discretion conferred under Section 397(1) of the Code is over ?

3. The circumstances in which the sentence on a subsequent conviction should be made to run concurrently with the previous sentence ?

2. The Mulaim Singh's case it appears that in Sessions Trial No. 149 of 1966 he was convicted under Sections 399, 402, 147, 307 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 25 of the Arms Act and was sentenced to various terms of imprisonment under various counts. The sentences were, however, directed to run concurrently. His appeal w