MUKHTIAR SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) :- Petitioner was first sentenced to 6 years RI under Sections 307/34 R.P.C. in file No. 59 of 1976 by Add. Sessions Judge, Jammu. He was later sentenced to 6 months' RI for the same offences in a separate trial by the learned Sessions Judge, Jammu. He filed Crl. first Appeal Nos. 52/80 and 17/81. In the first appeal his sentence of 6 months' RI was upheld but in the second it was reduced to 3 years. It was not, however, provided whether the sentences would run concurrently. He has now filed this petition under Section 397, Cr. P.C., and prays for the two sentences to be ordered to run concurrently and not consecutively.

(2.) It is the common ground that the petitioner had not asked for this either before the trial Court or the Appellate Court. Therefore, it remains to be seen whether he could do so now by approaching this court in an independent proceedings and purportedly under Section 397 Cr. P.C.

(3.) . According to Mr. Gandhi he was disabled to do so for having failed to ask for it before the trial or the appellate Courts. The grounds taken by him also would not justify any grant of relief to him. The Court was also incompetent to come to his rescue having become functus officio after it disposed of his appeals.