Rajasthan High Court
Abdul Sattar Son Of Khuda Bux vs State Of Rajasthan on 15 July, 2022
Bench: Birendra Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 5028/2022
Abdul Sattar Son Of Khuda Bux, Resident Of Banjaro Ka Mohalla,
Infront Of Badi Masjid, N.B.C. Road, Hasanpura-A, Jaipur (Raj).
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.P.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ummed Khicher
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Imran Khan, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR
Order
15/07/2022
Heard the parties.
The petitioner was convicted in following two cases and was
sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment of one year and to pay
different amount of fine separately in different cases. All the
judgments were passed on the same date i.e. 23.02.2017.
S.N Case No. Court Date of Sentence Fine / Appeal
o. Decision Compensation
1 2075/2015 Special 23.02.2017 Six months S.I. 17/2021
Metropolitan and fine of Rs.3 dismissed on
Magistrate lakh to be paid 22.02.2022
(NI Act as compensation
Cases) to the claimant
No.19, Jaipur
Metropolitan
(Raj.)
2 2079/2015 Special 23.02.2017 Six months S.I. 14/2021
Metropolitan and fine of Rs.5 dismissed on
Magistrate lakh to be paid 22.02.2022
(NI Act as compensation
Cases) to the claimant
No.19, Jaipur
Metropolitan
(Raj.)
(2 of 3) [CRLMP-5028/2022]
The appeals preferred against the judgments were already
dismissed.
Now, the prayer is that in view of the provisions of Section
427 Cr.P.C. and judgment of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in
S.B. Criminal Misc. (Petition) No.2883/2014, Rajendra Vs. State of
Rajasthan decided on 17.02.2017, the substantive sentence of
imprisonment should be directed to run concurrently.
Section 427 Cr.P.C. reads as follows:-
"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 imprison- ment by an order under
section 122 in default of furnishing security is,
whilst undergoing such sentence, sentenced to
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 con- currently with such
previous sentence."
(3 of 3) [CRLMP-5028/2022]
In Rajendra Vs. State of Rajasthan, conviction was recorded
under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in 32 cases.
This Court directed that the substantive sentences would run
concurrently and the fine as well as sentences in default of fine
would go as per the direction of the trial Judge. Section 427
Cr.P.C. does not cover the area of fine and default in payment of
fine.
Learned State Counsel submits that Section 427 Cr.P.C. is
applicable only in the matter of life imprisonment.
I do not find that the provision is applicable to the cases of
life imprisonment only and is not applicable in the matter of other
punishments of imprisonment.
Accordingly, the prayer of the petitioner is allowed and the
petition stands disposed of.
Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of.
Only substantive sentences of imprisonment would run
concurrently.
(BIRENDRA KUMAR),J
Sunita/27
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
