IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-21493 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision : 07.09.2011. Sat Narian alias Sattu alias Santu alias Satish ..Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ..Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAWAB SINGH Present: Mr. Jitender Nara, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Satyavir Singh Yadav, D.A.G., Haryana, for the respondent – State. NAWAB SINGH J.(ORAL) Sat Narian alias Sattu alias Santu alias Satish has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking direction that the sentences imposed upon him in three cases viz. (i) First Information Report (for short 'FIR') No.333 dated December 21st, 2002, under Sections 394, 397 and 412 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), Police Station Sampla; (ii) FIR No.61 dated May 8th, 2003, under Sections 392, 395, 398/120-B IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act, Police Station GRP Rohtak and; (iii) FIR No.114 dated March 18th, 2004, under Sections 379, 398, 401 and 411 IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act, Police Station City Rohtak, be directed to run concurrently. Petitioner was convicted by judgments dated March 16th, 2005, April 29th, 2005 and June 15th, 2005 (Annexures P-1 to P-3, respectively). The question arising for consideration is: Can this Court by exercising its power under Section 482 of the Code make the sentences awarded in three different cases to run concurrently? The question is no more a res-integra. It has been held by a full Bench of this Court in Jang Singh vs. State of Punjab 2008 (1) RCR (Criminal) 323 that the power to make the sentences to run concurrently can be exercised by the trial Court and if not done so, then by the Appellate Court or Revisional Court. This power cannot be exercised by invoking the provisions of Section 482 of the Code. Hence, the petition is dismissed. 07.09.2011 (NAWAB SINGH) neetu JUDGE