[Cites 13, Cited by 0]
Gujarat High Court
Ramjanbhai Hasambhai Khraj vs State Of Gujarat on 19 January, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/10324/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 19/01/2026
undefined
Reserved On :-
Pronounced On : 19/01/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (DIRECTION) NO. 10324 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✔
==========================================================
RAMJANBHAI HASAMBHAI KHRAJ
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS KD PARMAR(589) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR.MEET THAKKAR, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3,4
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. R. MENGDEY
CAV JUDGMENT
1. By filing present position under article 226 and 227 of the
constitution of India the petitioner has prayed for the
following reliefs :-
(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to admit and allow this
petition.
(B) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue appropriate writ,
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/10324/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 19/01/2026
undefined
order or direction and be pleased to direct to run the
sentences concurrently imposed in Criminal Case
No.4950 of 2003 on 23.02.2004 by Judicial Magistrate
First Class Court, Porbandar and confirmed in Criminal
Appeal No.03 of 2008 by Sessions Judge, Porbandar on
22.09.2008 in the interest of justice.
(C) kindly dispense with filing of affidavit as petitioner is in
jail.
(D) kindly grant the compensation as the provisions of the
Cr.P.C.
2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to filing the
present petition are such that the offence being C.R.No.80
of 1998 came to be registered against the petitioner with
Kalyanpur Police Station for the offence punishable under
Section 302 and 498A of the IPC. After conclusion of the
trial, the applicant was convicted for the said offence and
was imposed punishment of rigorous life imprisonment.
The applicant herein was ordered to be enlarged on
temporary bail by this Court for a period of 30 days. The
applicant was released from the custody pursuant to the
order of this Court on 12 th March, 2003 and was supposed
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/10324/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 19/01/2026
undefined
to surrender before the concerned jail authority on 12 th
April, 2003. However the petitioner did not surrender
before the jail authority on 12th April, 2003 and had
absconded. A separate offence came to be registered
against the petitioner for the offence punishable under
Section 51(B) of the Prison Act, 1960 with Bagodar Police
Station being C.R.II No.6 of 2003, which culminated in
Criminal Case No.4950 of 2003. Learned Judicial
Magistrate First Class, Porbandar vide judgment and order
dated 23.02.2004 was pleased to convict the petitioner for
the offence punishable under section 51(B)(1) of the Prison
Act and had imposed sentence of simple imprisonment for
a period of 2 years. Learned Magistrate, however, had
directed that the sentence would commence after
completion of the sentence of life imprisonment, which the
petitioner was already undergoing at the relevant time.
3. Being aggrieved by the said judgment and order, the
petitioner herein preferred Criminal Appeal No.3 of 2006
before the learned Sessions Court, Porbandar. The learned
Session Court, Porbandar vide judgment and order dated
22nd September, 2008 dismissed the Apple filed by the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/10324/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 19/01/2026
undefined
petitioner and confirmed the order passed by the learned
Magistrate. The State Government had considered the case
of the petitioner for grant of remission as regards the
sentence of life imprisonment and the petitioner was
ordered to be released as regards offences punishable
under the provisions of Section 302 and 498A of the IPC
and therefore, on 4th July, 2025 the petitioner was released
from the jail so far as it relates to the offence punishable
under Section 302 and 498A of the IPC. However, since
the sentence imposed upon the petitioner in another
offence was ordered to commence after completion of the
sentence of life imprisonment upon him, the petitioner is
still not effectively released from the jail and is presently
undergoing sentence imposed upon him by the learned
Magistrate in Criminal Case No.4950 of 2003. It is the case
on the part of the petitioner that in view of the provisions of
Section 427(2) of the Cr.P.C., subsequent sentence
imposed upon the petitioner has to run concurrently with
the sentence of life imprisonment. Therefore, the petitioner
has approached this Court by filing present petition.
4. Learned advocate Mr. H. B. Raval appearing for the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/10324/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 19/01/2026
undefined
petitioner submitted that the petitioner was undergoing
sentence of life imprisonment as he was convicted for the
offence punishable under the provisions of Section 302 and
498A of the IPC. While undergoing such sentence, the
petitioner was ordered to be enlarged on temporary bail for
some time. However, upon expiry of the period of
temporary release, the petitioner did not surrender to the
jail authorities and had absconded. Therefore, another
offence was registered against the petitioner wherein also
the petitioner was also convicted and was sentenced to
simple imprisonment for a period of two years. Since the
petitioner was undergoing sentence of life imprisonment at
the relevant time when the second offence was registered
against him, the case of the petitioner would fall under
Section 427(2) of the Cr.P.C. Therefore, learned trial Court
as well as learned Appellate Court could not have ordered
for the petitioner to undergo the sentence in the second
offence after completion of life imprisonment. As per the
provisions of Section 427(2) of the Cr.P.C., the order of
consecutive sentence can not be passed, if the person is
undergoing punishment of life imprisonment imposed upon
him in first offence and punishment imposed upon him in
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/10324/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 19/01/2026
undefined
the second offence has to run concurrently with the
punishment of life imprisonment. He, therefore, submitted
to allow the present petition and quash and set aside the
order impugned in the present petition and order to
enlarge the petitioner forthwith as he has already
completed all the sentence imposed upon him by now.
4.1. Learned advocate has sought to rely upon the judgment of
this Court in the case of Prabhatji Sukhaji Dabhi v. State
of Gujarat in the Criminal Appeal No.2203 of 2017.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has opposed the
grant of present petition inter-alia contending that relief
given under Section 427 of the Cr.P.C. is discretionary
relief and while exercising discretion in favour of the
petitioner, his conduct is also required to be seen. He
further submitted that while undergoing sentence of life
imprisonment, the petitioner had committed second offence
under the Prisons Act by not reporting to the jail authority
upon expiry of the temporary release. Therefore, discretion
available to this Court under Section 427 of the Cr.P.C.
cannot be exercised in favour of the petitioner. He,
therefore, submitted to dismiss the present petition.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/10324/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 19/01/2026
undefined
5.1 Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has sought to rely
upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
case of Mohd. Zahid v. State through NCB reported in
(2022) 12 SCC 426.
6. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties. It is an
admitted fact that the petitioner herein was convicted for
the offence punishable under Section 302 and 498A of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860 and was sentenced to undergo life
imprisonment for the same. While undergoing such
sentence, the petitioner came to be temporarily released for
a period of 30 days by the order of this Court. However,
upon expiry of 30 days, the petitioner did not surrender
before the jail authority and had absconded and therefore,
second offence came to be registered against him under the
Prisons Act. The learned trial Court upon conclusion of
trial, convicted the petitioner for the second offence and
imposed punishment of simple imprisonment for two years
upon the petitioner.
7. Section 427 of the Cr.P.C. which reads as under :-
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/10324/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 19/01/2026
undefined
"427:- Sentence on offender already sentenced for another
offence:-
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 sentence shall run concurrently
with such previous sentence
provided that where a person who has been
sentenced to imprisonment by an order under Section
122 in deafult of furnishing security is, whilst
imprisonment for an offence committed prior to the
making of such order, the latter sentence shall
commence immediately.
2. When a person already undergoing a sentence of
imprisonment for life is sentenced on a subsequent
conviction to imprisonment for a term or imprisonment
for life, the subsequent sentence shall run concurrently
with such previous sentence."
8. From the facts referred to herein above, there is no doubt
that the case of the petitioner would fall under Sub-Section
2 of the Section 427 and not under sub-section 1 of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/10324/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 19/01/2026
undefined
Section 427 and sub-section 2 of the Section 427 makes
the sentence imposed upon the person on a subsequent
conviction to imprisonment for a term or imprisonment for
life, who is already undergoing sentence of imprisonment of
life; to run concurrently; mandatory. Therefore, neither
learned trial Court nor the Appellate Court got any powers
or discretion to order the sentence imposed upon the
petitioner on subsequent conviction, to run after the
imprisonment of life was over. Therefore, the learned trial
Court as well as the learned Appellate Court have
committed grave error in ordering the sentence imposed
upon the petitioner in subsequent conviction to run
consecutively, in view of the provisions of Section 427(2) of
the Cr.P.C. The detention of the petitioner in second
offence after completion of punishment of life
imprisonment becomes illegal. Therefore, the present
petition deserves to be allowed and the same is hereby
allowed. From the jail remarks of the petitioner produced
on record, it appears that the petitioner has already
completed all the sentence imposed upon him and
therefore, he is ordered to be released forthwith. The
Registry shall communicate this order to the concerned jail
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/10324/2025 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 19/01/2026
undefined
authority through E-mail immediately. Direct service is
permitted TODAY.
(M. R. MENGDEY,J)
NABILA
