Criminal Writ Petition No.1076 of 2007 -1- **** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Writ Petition No.1076 of 2007 Date of decision : 1.9.2008 Malkiat Singh .....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. D. ANAND Present: Mr. V.K.Jindal, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Manjari Nehru, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State. S. D. ANAND, J. The conceded facts are as under:- Petitioner-prisoner was convicted in case FIR No. 143 dated 26.3.1974, Police Station Sadar, Ludhiana under Sections 148, 364, 307/149, 302 and 201 IPC. In that case, the followingt orders was passed on point of sentence:- “..... I sentence every one of the accused to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.2000/- or in default of payment of the same to undergo further R.I. For two years under Section 302/149 IPC. Rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs.500/- or in default of payment of the same to undergo further RI for six months under Section 307/149 IPC for murderous assault upon Charanjit Kaur; Rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs.500/- or in default of payment of fine of the same Criminal Writ Petition No.1076 of 2007 -2- **** undergo further RI for six months under section 307/149 IPC for murderous assault upon Satnam Singh; Rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs.500/- or in default of payment of the same to undergo further RI for six months under Section 307/149 IPC for murderous assault upon Gian Singh, Rigorous imprisonment for seven years and fine of Rs.500/- or in default of payment of the same to undergo further RI for six months under Section 364 IPC; Rigorous imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs.250/- or in default of payment of the same to undergo further RI for three months under Section 201 IPC; and Rigorous imprisonment for two years under Section 148 IPC. Only the sentences under section 307/149 IPC would run concurrently when these would start.” However, it was ordered by the learned Trial Magistrate that it is only the sentence awarded to the petitioner under Section 307/149 IPC which would run concurrently. It followed therefrom that the sentence awarded to him for the other offence would not run concurrently. The precise grievance of the petitioner, in the present writ petition, is that the rider imposed on concurrence of sentences is uncalled far and unconstitutional. In the counter, on behalf of respondents no. 1 to 3, the correctness of the order passed by the learned Trial Court has been Criminal Writ Petition No.1076 of 2007 -3- **** reiterated without, in any manner, indicating for the justification therefor. The plea raised by the petitioner is fully supported by judgment rendered by this Court in Criminal Misc. No. 59563-M of 2005 ( Jagsir Singh @ Pappu Vs. State of Punjab and another) decided on 16.11.2006. Learned State counsel could not invite the attention of this Court to any law to the contrary. The petition shall stand allowed accordingly. The plea of concurrent running of the sentences awarded to the petitioner for all the offences shall stand allowed. September 01, 2008 (S. D. ANAND) Pka JUDGE