RADHASYAM MISHRA Vs. REPUBLIC OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this application under Section 482, Cr. P.C. the petitioner who is serving the sentences awarded against him in seven cases instituted by Special Police Establishment has prayed for issuance of a direction that the sentences awarded against him in S.P.E. Case Nos. 12 and 17 of 1990 and 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 of 1991 shall run concurrently.

(2.) THE facts which gave rise to this petition are as follows : The petitioner who was working as the Post Master in the Extra Departmental Post Office at Bharauja in the district of Bolangir faced his trial for a charge under Section 409, I.P.C. in the aforementioned seven cases. After trial, the petitioner was sentenced by the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhubaneswar on 31.5.1993 for the offence under Section 409, I.P.C. in S.P.E. Cases No. 12 of 1990 to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five months and to pay fine of Rs. 2000/ - and in default, to further R.I. for two months, in S.P.E. Case No. 17 of 1990 to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months and to pay fine of Rs. 300/ - and in default, to further R.I. for 15 days, in S.P.E. Case No. 8 of 1991 to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months and to pay fine of Rs. 300/ - and in default to further R.I. for 15 days. On 16.8.1993 the petitioner was convicted and sentenced for the offence under Section 409, I.P.C. in S.P.E. Case No. 11 of 1991 and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 2 1/2 years and to pay fine of Rs. 1000/ - and in default, to further R.I. for two months. On 28.8.1993 the petitioner was convicted and sentenced in S.P.E. Case No. 9 of 1991 to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs. 500/ - and in default, to suffer R.I. for one month and in S.P.E. Case No 10 of 1991 to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs. 1000/ - and in default, to undergo R.I. for two months. Further on 17.9.1993 the petitioner was convicted for the offence under Section 409, I.P.G. in S.P.E. Case No. 12 of 1991 and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs. 1000/ - and in default, to suffer R.I. for two months. The petitioner now has come up with this petition seeking a direction for concurrent running of the sentences.

(3.) THE next question which requires consideration is whether the petitioner who is undergoing sentences awarded against him in the aforementioned cases for the offence under Section 409, I.P.C. should be granted the relief prayed for. In this context, it is noticed that the petitioner is in custody since 31.8.1993. The period of imprisonment awarded in the aforementioned seven cases taken together is seven years five months. By now the petitioner has already suffered incarceration for more than 3 1/2 years. The longest period of sentence imposed in a single case is 2 1/2 years imposed in S.P.E. Case No. 11 of 1991 on 16.8.1993. In the above circumstances, taking into consideration the nature of the offence, the total period of the imprisonment awarded and the total period already undergone, it is felt that the relief sought for if granted will serve the ends of justice. Hence, it is directed that the substantive sentences imposed on the petitioner in the aforementioned seven cases shall run concurrently. The Criminal Misc. Case is accordingly disposed of.