MOHAMMAD RAFIQ,J. - (1.) This is indeed a glaring example of how brazenly state authorities can play with the personal liberty of a citizen. Madan Singh, father of the petitioner Sushil Singh Panwar, who was entitled to be immediately set free from the prison in compliance of the judgment dated 08.03.2017 passed by this Court in S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 3560/2015, has not been released as yet and continues to languish in jail.
(2.) As per the details furnished by the petitioner in the memorandum of the petition, his father Madan Singh was initially convicted in Criminal Case No. 30/2003 vide judgment dated 30.08.2007 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 7, Jaipur Metropolitan whereby he was awarded substantive sentence of 6 months with fine, in default of payment of fine, he was to further undergo imprisonment of 3 months. Madan Singh filed appeal against the aforesaid judgment. The appellate court reduced the substantive sentence awarded to him from 6 months to 3 months with fine and in default of payment of fine, he was to further undergo imprisonment of 2 months. He served out both substantive sentence of 3 months and default sentence of 2 months. It was thereafter that he was convicted in different five cases for the same offence of Section 138, N.I. Act and awarded substantive sentence of different prescription with fine and in default of payment of fine, he was ordered to undergo simple imprisonment for different duration. Details of sentences awarded in all such five cases are mentioned as below: JUDGEMENT_419_LAWS(RAJ)1_2018_1.html
(3.) Madan Singh, father of the petitioner approached this Court by filing S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition No. 3560/2015 under Section 482 Cr.P.C., 1973 inter alia praying for direction that substantive sentences awarded to him in the aforementioned five cases be ordered to run concurrently as the trial courts/appellate courts in all the aforementioned cases have erred in law in directing so by ignoring the provisions of Section 427 Cr.P.C., 1973 A learned Single Judge of this Court, allowed the petition vide order dated 08.03.2017 in the following terms:- "9. I have considered the contentions and have gone through the judgments on which the counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance. The Court below in this case have considered the provision of Section 427 Cr.P.C., 1973 and as held in "Arjun Ram v. State of Rajasthan" This Court is inclined to invoke the inherent powers vested under Section 482 Cr.P.C., 1973 10. As the present petitioner is languishing in jail from 16.02.2013 in relation to conviction in five cases under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and in none of the cases the provision of Section 427 Cr.P.C., 1973 was taken note of by the Court below, taking note of the fact that the petitioner has already undergone a sentence of more than four years in light of the judgment of the Apex Court, State of Punjab v. Madan Lal ". I deem it proper to allow the miscellaneous petition. 11. Consequently, the miscellaneous petition is allowed. It is directed that the sentences passed in all aforesaid complaints, would run concurrently.";