STATION AND TEHSIL GHUMARWIN, DISTRICT BILASPUR, HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, THROUGH SECRETARY HOME TO THE GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. against the order dated 22.2.2011 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ghumarwin, dismissing petition No. 20/4 of 2011 filed by petitioner under Section 427 Cr.P.C. on the ground that petitioner has been sentenced for offences punishable under Sections 377, 354 IPC. He has not been released by the Jail Authorities on the grounds that the Court has not directed that the sentences should run concurrently or consecutively. The learned Judicial Magistrate vide order dated 22.2.2011 dismissed the application on the ground that Section 31 Cr.P.C. provides that unless the Court directs the sentence to run concurrently, the sentence for two or more offences at one trial will commence one after the expiration of the other. The petitioner cannot claim his release without serving the sentence imposed upon him separately for both the sentences. The application filed by the petitioner was held not maintainable and the petitioner is not entitled to claim his release before undergoing the sentence imposed upon him.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Section 31 Cr.P.C. provides that when a person is convicted at one trial of two or more offences, the Court may, subject to the provisions of Section 71 of the Indian Penal Code sentence him for such offences, to the several punishments prescribed therefore which such Court is competent to inflict; such punishments when consisting of imprisonment to commence the one after the expiration of the other in such order as the Court may direct, unless the Court directs that such punishments shall run concurrently.