SHARMA, J. - (1.) THE Habeas Corpus petition appears to have been filed by taking recourse to Sub-section 2 of Section 427 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which provides as under:-      " When a person already undergoing a sentence of imprisonment for life, the sentence on a subsequent conviction to imprisonment to a term or imprisonment for life, the subsequent sentence shall run concurrently. "
(2.) ADMITTED position is that detenue/accused Hemu @ Hemant, who was convicted and sentenced by the trial Court under Sections 302, 148 and 324/149 of the Indian Penal Code, stood acquitted by the High Court in D. B. Criminal appeal No. 1275/2002, decided on January 3, 2008. During the period when Hemant was in custody, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhalawar, in case No. 15/2007, convicted and sentenced him under Section 4/25 of the Arms Act to suffer simple imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs. 500/- in default to further suffer one month simple imprisonment. It was further directed that period of detention undergone by him in the police or judicial custody shall be adjusted. In view of the provisions contained in Sub-Section 2 of Section 427, the sentence awarded by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhalawar ought to have been run concurrently with the sentence awarded in sessions case but the Jail Authorities misinterpreted Section 427 (2) and took Hemant in custody again for serving-out the sentence awarded by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhalawar. Hemant Could not have been detained beyond January 24, 2002 and his detention after this date was illegal and unlawful. For these reasons, we allow this petition and direct the Superintendent, Central Jail, Kota to release the detenue Hemu @ Hemant forthwith if he is not required to be detained in any other case. The detenue Hemu @ Hemant Kumar shall also be entitled to the cost which we quantify as Rs. 10,000/- to be paid by the State of Rajasthan. A copy of this other be remitted to Superintendent, Central Jail, Kota. .;