LAWS(DLH)-2019-2-30

IRFAN Vs. STATE

Decided On February 05, 2019
IRFAN Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Exemption is allowed subject to all just exceptions.

(2.) Petitioner has been convicted of an offence under Section 382 IPC read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced to undergo 4 years rigorous imprisonment and also convicted of an offence under Section 25(1-B) (a) Arms Act and sentenced to undergo 1 year rigorous imprisonment for the same. By order on sentence dated 15.09.2018, the Trial Court directed that both the sentences to run one after the other.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia submits that order on sentence dated 15.09.2018 is erroneous and contrary to the settled position of law and submits that as the both the offences were part of one transaction, the Trial Court erred in directing that the substantive sentences shall run one after the other. He contends that in view of Section 31 of the Criminal Procedure Code, as interpreted by the Supreme Court in Manoj Alais Pannu vs. State of Haryana, 2014 2 SCC 153, sentences should have run concurrently and not consecutively.