M.L.SINGHAL,J. - (1.) BY means of this order I will dispose of Crl. Misc. Petition No. 666-M of 1996; Crl. Misc. Petition No. 890-M of 1996 and Crl. Misc. Petition No. 1245-M of 1996 as in all these Criminal Misc. Petitions, the same question of law is involved, viz. whether the sentence awarded to Gurbax Singh, petitioner in Crl. Misc. Petition No. 666-M of 1996 and Shisha Singh petitioner in Crl. Misc. Petition No. 890-M of 1996 and Amrik Singh, petitioner in Crl. Misc. Petition No. 1245-M of 1996 awarded in case FIR No. 7 dated 1.1.1989 can be made concurrent with the sentence awarded in case FIR No. 164 dated 1.9.1989 by two different Courts at different trials in different Sessions cases.
(2.) IN case FIR No. 7 dated 1.1.1989, under Sections 307/326/324/323/325/149, 148 IPC, Shri Dhani Ram, Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra sentenced Gurbax Singh; Amrik Singh and Shisha Singh to undergo RI for one year each under section 148 IPC. He sentenced them to undergo RI for five years each and to pay fine of Rs. 500/- under sections 307/149 IPC. He sentenced Shisha Singh and Gurbax Singh to undergo RI for three years and to pay fine of Rs. 500/- each under section 326 IPC. He sentenced Amrik Singh to undergo RI for three years and to pay fine of Rs. 500/- each under section 326 read with section 149 IPC. He sentenced them to undergo RI for 1-1/2 years each and to pay fine of Rs. 300/- each under Sections 325/149 IPC. He sentenced Amrik Singh to undergo RI for one years each under Section 324 IPC. He sentenced Gurbax Singh and Shisha Singh to undergo RI for one year each under Sections 324/149 IPC. He sentenced them to undergo RI for six months each under Sections 323/149 IPC vide order dated 16.4.1994. He ordered the sentences to run concurrently. In case FIR No. 164 dated 1.9.1989 under Sections 148, 307/149, 302/149, 120-B IPC, Shri P.C. Nariala, Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra, vide judgment dated 13/14th February, 1991 convicted and sentenced them to various terms of imprisonment. In appeal, this Court convicted and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life under Sections 302/34 IPC for the murder of Kulwant Singh and Bidhi Shankar. They were convicted and sentenced under Sections 323/34 IPC for injury to Jagjit Singh PW to undergo one month's R.I. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently by this Court. In these criminal misc. petitions, the prayer is that the sentences awarded in these two sessions trials be made to run concurrently with each other. Reason given in these criminal misc. petitions is that when they were sentenced in the FIR No. 7 dated 1.1.1989 on 16.4.1994 by Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra, they were undergoing life imprisonment in case FIR No. 164 dated 1.9.1989 awarded to them by Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra vide order dated 13/14th February, 1991. This fact was not brought to the notice of the Court, at the time, when they were sentenced in case FIR No. 7 dated 1.1.1989 on 16.4.1994. As per section 433-A Cr.P.C., introduced on 18.12.1978, a lifer has to undergo imprisonment for life. Section 427(2) Cr.P.C. provides that if a person already undergoing imprisonment for life is sentenced on subsequent conviction to imprisonment for a term or imprisonment for life, subsequent sentence shall run concurrently with such previous sentence. Here, they were already undergoing imprisonment for life in case FIR No. 164 dated 1.9.1989 when they were convicted and sentenced to imprisonment to a term on 16.4.1994. Subsequent sentences should run concurrently with the previous sentence.
(3.) IN each of these petitions, the prayer made, was contested by the State through separate written-statements filed to each of the petitions urging that the Additional Sessions Judge who passed subsequent conviction and sentence had not ordered that conviction and sentence shall run concurrently with the conviction and sentence passed earlier on 13/14.2.1991. The Superintendent, District Jail, Kurukshetra has to execute the sentences passed upon them in the manner as indicated on the warrants of commitment to jail. On the warrants of commitment to the jail, there is no indication that subsequent sentence shall run concurrently with the previous sentence. He is to execute the sentences in the manner as indicated on the Warrants of commitment to jail.;