DOMINIC Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was the accused in CC No. 1737 of 2005 on the file of the Additional chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Ernakulam. The prosecution case was that on 05.05.2005 at about 10 in the night, he committed lurking house-trespass in order to commit theft. He was tried for the offences under Sections 457 and 511 r/w Section 380 of the Indian Penal Code. The trial ended in his conviction for both the offences. For the offence under Section 457 IPC he was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of payment of the fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of one month. For the offence under Section 511 IPC he was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for three months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default of the payment of the fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of one month. The learned magistrate directed that the sentence shall run concurrently. In Crl. Appeal No. 531 of 2012 the learned Sessions Judge confirmed the order of conviction and sentence also, but at the same time, he directed that the sentence for the offences shall run consecutively. This is challenged.

(2.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

(3.) There cannot be any dispute that the direction of the learned Sessions Judge that the sentence shall run consecutively is illegal.