Back
SIDDHARTHA VARMA, ANISH KUMAR GUPTA
Anil Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Anish Kumar Gupta, J. :
1. Heard Sri Grijesh Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rahul Asthana, learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The petitioner, before this Court, has filed the instant Habeas Corpus Writ Petition through his father, Prakash. In this writ petition, the petitioner has submitted that he was implicated in Case Crime No.47 of 2013 under Section 18/20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred as 'the NDPS Act'), P.S.-Sikandra, District- Kanpur Nagar Dehat and he is in jail since 05.08.2013. The said Case Crime No. 47 of 2013 had resulted in Sessions Trial No. 19 of 2013 and the petitioner herein was convicted vide judgement and order dated 22.07.2015 under Section 20(B)(II)(C) of the NDPS Act and the petitioner was sentenced to undergo 12 years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-. Against the said judgement and order dated 22.07.2015, the petitioner herein had filed an appeal being Criminal Appeal No. 4024 of 2015 (Anil Kumar Vs. State of U.P.), wherein during the pendency of the appeal, vide order dated 09.08.2023, the petitioner herein has been directed to be released on bail. It is fu
(1) If a person already undergoing a sentence of imprisonment is sentenced on a subsequent conviction to imprisonment, such subsequent term of imprisonment would normally commence at expiration of im....
Defiance of Parole order – When a sentence of imprisonment for a term is passed under the Code on an escaped convict, Section 426(2)(a) Cr.P.C., is applicable and Court has to take note of explicit p....
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.
Petitioner is not entitled for the relief as contended in the petition to make the sentence as concurrent instead of consecutive and there is an explicit proviso under Section 426 of Cr.P.C., with re....
Court can use discretion under Section 427 of CrPC to allow concurrent sentences in cases arising from similar transactions, particularly for financial offences without violence.
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....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the discretionary powers of the criminal courts in applying Section 427 Cr.P.C. and determining the concurrent running of sentences in multiple cas....
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
