Criminal Misc. No. M-13923 of 2009 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** Criminal Misc. No. M-13923 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision:06.11.2009 Irfan Ahmed .....Petitioner Vs. State of Haryana .....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARBANS LAL Present:- Mr. J.S. Mehndiratta, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Naveen Malik, Additional Advocate General, Haryana. **** HARBANS LAL, J. This petition has been moved by Irfan Ahmed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for making the sentence awarded to him in case FIR No.208 dated 27.12.2003 registered under Section 420 of IPC at Police Station Sadar, Yamuna Nagar by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Yamuna Nagar concurrent with life imprisonment awarded to him by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Yamuna Nagar in case FIR No.36 dated 12.3.2006 registered at Police Station Boria vide judgment/ order dated 12.12.2007 in terms of Section 427(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for brevity, `the Code'). The brief facts are that the petitioner was tried for offences under Sections 120-B, 302, 323, 365, 508 of IPC in FIR No.36 ibid. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Yamuna Nagar vide judgment dated 12.12.2007 convicted and sentenced the petitioner to undergo imprisonment Criminal Misc. No. M-13923 of 2009 (O&M) -2- for life under Section 302 read with Section 120-B of IPC besides imposing sentence under other Sections. He was subsequently convicted by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri vide judgment dated 8.3.2008 and the sentence was imposed on him vide order dated 10.3.2008. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties, besides perusing the record with due care and circumspection. Learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously urged that as per Section 427(2) of the Code when a person already undergoing a sentence of imprisonment for life is sentenced on a subsequent conviction to imprisonment for a term, the subsequent sentence shall run concurrently with such previous sentence. The said Section is mandatory in nature and does not leave any discretion to the Court to make the subsequent sentence consecutive. The intention of legislature is clear that subsequent sentence has to be concurrent. The learned State Counsel could not controvert this submission in a successful manner. In re: Jang Singh v. State of Punjab, 2008(1) Recent Criminal Reports (Criminal) 323, the Full Bench of this Court has observed that “where the accused is already undergoing a sentence of imprisonment for life and he is subsequently sentenced to life imprisonment in another case, subsequent sentence shall run concurrently.” In the present one, the petitioner was undergoing imprisonment for life inflicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Yamuna Nagar on 12.12.2007. Subsequently, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three Criminal Misc. No. M-13923 of 2009 (O&M) -3- years under Section 420 of IPC by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri. The language of Section 427(2) ibid has been couched by the legislature in the widest possible terms. The petitioner's case is squarely covered by the ratio decidendi laid down in re: Jang Singh (supra). Sequelly, it is directed that the sentence awarded to the petitioner in case FIR No.208 ibid shall run concurrently with life imprisonment awarded vide judgment/ order dated 12.12.2007 passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Yamuna Nagar. Disposed of accordingly. November 06, 2009 ( HARBANS LAL ) renu JUDGE