Dandupalya Krishna vs State Of Karnataka
2021 Latest Caselaw 7163 Kant

                               1




IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

      DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021

                             BEFORE

 THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SREENIVAS HARISH KUMAR

     WRIT PETITION No.16268 OF 2021(GM-RES)


BETWEEN

Dandupalya Krishna
@ Hosakote Krishna @ Krishna,
S/o Seethappa,
Aged about 51 years,
R/at Dandupalya,
Hosakote Taluk,
Bengaluru District-562114.

(Now in Judicial Custody,
 Central Prison, Hindalga,
 Belgaum).
                                              ...Petitioner
(By Sri Hashmath Pasha, Senior Advocate for
    Sri Nasir Ali, Advocate)

AND

1.    State of Karnataka
      By its Secretary Department of
      Home and Prison, Vidhana Soudha,
      Bengaluru-560001.

2.    Inspector General of Prison,
      Office at: Opp.- Freedom Park,
      Seshadri Road, Bengaluru-560009.
                              2




3.    Chief Superintendent,
      Central Prison, Hindalga,
      Belgaum-591108.
                                             ...Respondents
(By Sri V.S.Hegde, SPP II A/w
    Sri B.J.Rohith, HCGP)

     This Writ Petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227
of the Constitution of India and under Sections 482 and
427 of the Cr.P.C., praying to direct the respondents to
follow the provision of Section 427 sub section (2) of
Cr.P.C. in Calculation of subsequent 5 cases sentences
imposed   in   (1)   SC   No.416/2003   clubbed   with   SC
No.417/2003 sentences dated 17.02.2004 of Seven years
passed on the file of the Hon'ble 34th Additional City civil
and Sessions Court Special Court Central Prison Premises,
Bengaluru and etc.


     This Writ Petition coming on for admission this day,
the Court made the following:


                          ORDER

Heard Sri. Hashmath Pasha, Senior Counsel for

the petitioner and Sri. V.S. Hegde, SPP-II and also Sri.

B.J.Rohith, Government Pleader for respondents.

2. In this writ petition, the petitioner has sought

a writ of mandamus or an appropriate direction to the

respondents to follow the provisions of section 427(2)

Cr.P.C. in calculation of sentence imposed on him in

cases decided subsequent to judgment of conviction

dated 22.3.2003 in S.C. No. 500/2000 by IV Addl.

City Civil and Session Judge, Mayo Hall,

Bengaluru.

3. It is stated that the petitioner was imposed

with life imprisonment and a fine of Rs.35,000/-

consequent to his conviction for the offence under

section 302 Cr.P.C. in S.C.No.500/2000.

Subsequently he was found guilty in other criminal

cases viz., S.C.Nos.416/2003 and 417/2003 decided

on 17.2.2004, S.C.No.412/2003 clubbed with

S.C.No.418/2003 decided on 17.02.2004,

S.C.No.370/2002 decided on 14.07.2005,

C.C.No.24693/2000 decided on 26.4.2005 and

S.C.No.404/2003 decided on 24.7.2010. In all the

subsequent cases, the petitioner was sentenced to

imprisonment for a lesser period than the sentence

imposed in the first case i.e., S.C.No.500/2000. His

grievance is that in view of lesser period of

imprisonment being awarded in the subsequent cases,

all those imprisonment periods would run concurrently

with life imprisonment awarded in S.C.No.500/2000.

In relation to S.C.No.500/2000, he has already spent

a period of 21 years and therefore he is entitled to

seek remission under section 432 Cr.P.C.

4. According to Sri. V.S.Hegde, learned SPP-II,

the decision as to remission is to be taken by the

Government and therefore this court cannot, in this

writ petition, give any direction.

5. Though it is left to the Government to take a

decision whether remission is to be granted or not, it

is not in dispute that the petitioner was sentenced to

undergo life imprisonment in the first case i.e.,

S.C.No.500/2000 and in all subsequent cases, the

period of imprisonment is for a lesser period. Section

427(2) of Cr.P.C. clearly states that if an accused has

been awarded sentence of life imprisonment in one

case and that he is sentenced to imprisonment in

subsequent cases, the punishment of imprisonment in

all the subsequent cases would run concurrently with

the life imprisonment imposed in the first case. In

this view, the petitioner would be entitled to the

benefit of section 427(2) Cr.P.C. and he gets a right to

apply for remission of the sentence.

From the above discussion, a writ is issued

declaring that the petitioner is entitled to benefit

under section 427(2) Cr.P.C. and that the sentence of

imprisonment imposed on him in the cases namely

S.C.No.416/2003 c/w S.C.No.417/2003,

S.C.No.412/2003 c/w S.C.No.418/2003,

S.C.No.370/2002, C.C.No.24693/2000 and

S.C.N.404/2003 would run concurrently with life

imprisonment imposed in S.C.No.500/2000.

Sd/-

JUDGE

sd