SUNIL BHIMA KURHADE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Short issue involved in this petition is whether the Petitioner is entitled to the benefit of concurrent sentence as laid down in the provisions of sec. 427 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He was convicted firstly for the offence punishable under sec. 302. 341 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code on 30/8/2012. When he was undergoing this sentence, he was convicted on 12/2/2014 for the offence punishable under sec. 324 r/w. 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The grievance of the Petitioner is that the learned Magistrate who convicted him in subsequent trial was aware that the petitioner is in jail but still he has not given the benefit of sec. 427(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. There is subsequent development. The Petitioner was acquitted by this Court vide Order dtd. 9/8/2021 in Criminal Appeal No. 1131/2012 and 229/2019. The Petitioner has brought this fact to the notice of learned Magistrate on 23/8/2021. He called a report from jail authorities. Instead of giving the benefit of concurrent sentence, the learned Magistrate has left the issue with the jail authorities by observing that if the Petitioner has undergone sentence of 2 years 6 months ( and if not required in any other case), he be released (letter dtd. 3/9/2021, page 87). We have heard Mr. Niranjan Mundargi, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Mrs. S.D. Shinde, APP for the State.

(3.) Petitioner's grievance is that the learned Magistrate ought to have issued clear direction. That is why this petition is filed. It will be material to consider few relevant dates. they are as follows: