GURNAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FACTS necessary for the disposal of this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition are that the petitioner was undergoing life imprisonment in case FIR No. 105 dated 28.11.75, P. S. Bhadson, District Patiala, when he was again sentenced to life imprisonment in another case FIR No. 71 dated 12.9.86, P. S. Amargarh, District Sangrur. It was not brought to the notice of the Court at the time of the decision of the latter case that the petitioner was already undergoing life imprisonment following conviction in an earlier case. The result was that no direction was given by the Court that the life imprisonment awarded in the second case would run concurrently with the first case noted above. Through this criminal miscellaneous petition, the petitioner seeks suitable directions that the later sentence would run concurrently with the earlier one.

(2.) WE have heard Shri R. S. Ghai, Sr. Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri S. S. Dhaliwal, learned DAG Punjab for the State. The relevant provision is in Section 427 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which reads as under : - "427. Sentence of 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 imprisonment by art 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 concurrently with such previous sentence." A reading of both the sub -sections of Section 427 of the Code unmistakably shows that there is a clear distinction between imprisonment for a term on the one hand and imprisonment for life on the other. Sub -section (1) of Section 427 of the Code deals with a situation where a person is already undergoing a sentence of imprisonment for a term as distinguished from imprisonment for life and such a person is again sentenced to an imprisonment for a term or imprisonment for life on a subsequent conviction. The general rule laid down in sub -section (1) is that unless the court directs that the subsequent sentence shall run concurrently with such previous sentence, the subsequent sentence shall commence at the expiration of the earlier sentence.

(3.) SUB -section (2) is an exception to the above general rule. It lays down that where a person is already undergoing a sentence of imprisonment for life and he is again sentenced to life imprisonment on a subsequent conviction, the subsequent sentence shall run concurrently with the previous sentence.