Criminal Misc. No.M-27915 of 2008 -1- **** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No.M-27915 of 2008 Date of decision : 25.11.2009 Gurbachan Singh ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent **** CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. D. ANAND Present: Mr. Sanjeev Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Ashvinder Singh, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab S. D. ANAND, J. The petitioner was convicted by the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Ferozepur (in case FIR No. 87 dated 26.9.1993 under Section 302 IPC, Police Station, City Ferozepur), vide judgment dated 2.12.1994, and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-. In default of payment of fine, he was directed to further undergo RI for a period of six month. Thereafter, the petitioner was convicted by the learned Sessions Judge, Ferozepur in another case (FIR No. 162 dated 17.5.1993 under Sections 302/449 IPC and 27 of the Arms Act, Police Station, Sadar Ferozepur), vide judgment dated 31.10.1995 and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.600/- under Section 302 IPC. In default of payment of fine, he was directed to further undergo RI for a period of four month. The petitioner was also sentenced to undergo RI for a period of ten years and to pay a fine of Rs.100/-under Section 449 IPC. In default of payment of fine, he was directed to further undergo RI for a Criminal Misc. No.M-27915 of 2008 -2- **** period of one month. The petitioner was also sentenced to undergo RI for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs.100/-under Section 27 of the Arms Act. In default of payment of fine, he was directed to further undergo RI for a period of one month The concurrent running of sentences awarded to a lifer at different points of time is envisioned by the statutory provisions contained in Section 427 of the Cr.P.C. itself . The learned State Counsel is not in a position to contest the applicability of the provisions aforementioned to the case of the petitioner. A similar view had been taken by this Court in Criminal Writ Petition No.1076 of 2007 (Malkiat Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others) decided on 1.9.2008. It is not even the averment on behalf of the respondents that the judgment aforementioned was ever challenged before the Apex Court. That judgment has, thus, attained finality and has to be compulsively complied with by all concerned. The petition shall stand allowed. The respondents are directed to treat the sentences awarded to the petitioner vide judgments Annexures P/1 and P/2 as concurrent interse. The consequential action on the part of the respondents ought to follow forthwith. Disposed of accordingly. November 25, 2009 (S. D. ANAND) Pka JUDGE