9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Interpretation and application of Sections 427 & 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 2. Whether the period of remand in one case can be set off against the sentence in another case. Summary: Issue 1: Interpretation and application of Sections 427 & 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 The petitioner sought release from custody, arguing that he had served his sentences if proper calculation was made. The case involved interpreting Sections 427 & 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The primary question was whether the period of remand while serving a sentence in one case could be considered for set off against the sentence in another case. Issue 2: Whether the period of remand in one case can be set off against the sentence in another caseThe petitioner relied on previous judgments, including *State of Maharashtra v. Najakat alias Mubarak Ali* and argued that the remand period should be set off against the sentence in the second case. The State, however, cited *Atul Manubhai Parekh v. Central Bureau Of Investigation* to argue that the period of remand while serving a sentence in another case cannot be set off. Facts:The petitioner was convicted in three different cases. In the first case, he was sentenced to 3 years and 3 months, with the benefit of set off for the under-trial period, leading to a release date of 23-07-2008. In the second case, he was sentenced to life imprisonment starting from 24-07-2008. In the third case, he was sentenced to 2 years and 6 months, with the sentences ordered to run concurrently. Legal Provisions:The relevant statutory provisions include Sections 31(1), 427, and 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Section 64 of the Indian Penal Code. Section 428 provides for the set off of the period of detention as an under-trial against the sentence upon conviction in the same case. Judgments Referred:The court referred to several judgments, including *Government of Andhra Pradesh v. Anne Venkatesware*, *Champalal Punjaji Shah v. State Of Maharashtra*, *Raghvir Singh v. State of Haryana*, *State of Maharashtra v. Najakat Alia Mubarak Ali*, *Maliyakkal Abdul Azeez v. Assistant Collector, Kerala*, *State Of Punjab v. Madan Lal*, and *Atul Manubhai Parekh v. Central Bureau Of Investigation*. Court's Analysis:The court noted that the principle of set off under Section 428 applies to the period of detention as an under-trial in the same case. The court distinguished between different types of detention, emphasizing that the period spent serving a sentence as a convict cannot be set off against the remand period in another case. The court upheld the State's contention that the remand period in the third case, while the petitioner was already serving a life sentence, cannot be considered for set off. Conclusion:The court dismissed the petition, stating that the petitioner's contention for early release had no merit. The judgment emphasized that set off under Section 428 is case-specific and does not apply to periods of detention while serving sentences in other cases. Petition Dismissed.
|
