(1.) The three petitioners were convicted by a First Class Magistrate of Monghyr under Secs.457 and 380, I.P.C. The order portion of the learned Magistrate's judgment though not very happily worded makes it clear that he has passed separate sentences of three months rigorous imprisonment on each of the petitioners for each of the two offences and has added a fine of Rs. 15 on each of them under Section 380, I.P.C.
(2.) The learned Magistrate not having specified that the two sentences of three months rigorous imprisonment on each of the petitioners were to run concurrently, they must be held to have been ordered to run consecutively under Section 35, Criminal P.C. The appeal of the petitioners was dismissed by the Sessions Judge and the petitioners have come up for revision.
(3.) A limited rule was issued by a learned Judge of this Court to examine the legality of the separate sentences under Secs.380 and 457, I.P.C. Prior to the amendment of the Criminal Procedure Code in 1923, there were a number of decisions of this Court to show that such sentences were illegal and it was clearly so under the illustration which was given in Section 35, Criminal P.C. The Section empowered the Court to pass separate sentences for distinct offences and provided that such separate sentences would run consecutively unless ordered to run concurrently.