Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Ramjanbhai Hasambhai Khraj, was convicted for offences under Sections 302 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to rigorous life imprisonment. While serving his sentence, he was granted temporary bail for 30 days by the High Court and released on 12th March 2003. He was required to surrender on 12th April 2003 but failed to do so and absconded. Consequently, a separate offence was registered against him for absconding, leading to Criminal Case No.4950 of 2003, in which he was convicted on 23rd February 2004 by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Porbandar, and sentenced to additional imprisonment. The conviction was confirmed in Criminal Appeal No.03 of 2008 by the Sessions Judge, Porbandar on 22nd September 2008. The petitioner filed the present petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution seeking a direction that the sentences in Criminal Case No.4950 of 2003 run concurrently with his life sentence. The High Court considered the provisions of Section 427 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), which empowers the court to order that subsequent sentences run concurrently with earlier ones if the offences arise from the same transaction or if it is in the interests of justice. The court noted that the subsequent conviction was for absconding during temporary bail, which was directly connected to the original life sentence. The petitioner had already undergone a significant portion of his life sentence. The court held that to avoid double punishment for what was essentially a breach of bail conditions, the sentences should run concurrently. The petition was allowed, and the court directed that the sentence in Criminal Case No.4950 of 2003 run concurrently with the life sentence imposed in the earlier case.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Concurrent Sentences - Section 427 CrPC - Direction to run sentences concurrently - Petitioner, a life convict, absconded during temporary bail and was convicted in a separate case under Section 224 IPC - Court held that the sentence in the subsequent case should run concurrently with the life sentence, as the subsequent offence arose from the same transaction and the petitioner had already undergone substantial imprisonment - Held that the interests of justice require concurrent running of sentences (Paras 1-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the sentences imposed in Criminal Case No.4950 of 2003 should run concurrently with the life sentence imposed in the earlier case, considering the petitioner absconded during temporary bail.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The sentence imposed in Criminal Case No.4950 of 2003 shall run concurrently with the life sentence imposed in the earlier case.
Law Points
- Concurrent sentences
- Section 427 CrPC
- temporary bail
- absconding
- life imprisonment
- Section 302 IPC
- Section 498A IPC
Case Details
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (DIRECTION) NO. 10324 of 2025
MS KD PARMAR for the Applicant(s) No. 1, MR.MEET THAKKAR, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
Ramjanbhai Hasambhai Khraj
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Special Criminal Application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution seeking direction for concurrent running of sentences.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought a writ or direction to run the sentences imposed in Criminal Case No.4950 of 2003 concurrently with the life sentence imposed in the earlier case.
Filing Reason
Petitioner was convicted for absconding during temporary bail and sought that the subsequent sentence run concurrently with his life sentence.
Previous Decisions
Petitioner was convicted under Sections 302 and 498A IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment. He was granted temporary bail but absconded, leading to a separate conviction in Criminal Case No.4950 of 2003 on 23.02.2004, confirmed in Criminal Appeal No.03 of 2008 on 22.09.2008.
Issues
Whether the sentences in Criminal Case No.4950 of 2003 should run concurrently with the life sentence imposed in the earlier case under Section 427 CrPC.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the subsequent conviction arose from the same transaction of temporary bail and that he had already undergone substantial imprisonment, thus concurrent sentences would serve the interests of justice.
Ratio Decidendi
Under Section 427 CrPC, a court may order that a subsequent sentence run concurrently with an earlier sentence if the offences arise from the same transaction or if it is in the interests of justice. Here, the subsequent conviction for absconding during temporary bail was directly connected to the original life sentence, and the petitioner had already undergone substantial imprisonment, making concurrent sentences appropriate.
Judgment Excerpts
By filing present position under article 226 and 227 of the constitution of India the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs :-
The facts and circumstances giving rise to filing the present petition are such that the offence being C.R.No.80 of 1998 came to be registered against the petitioner with Kalyanpur Police Station for the offence punishable under Section 302 and 498A of the IPC.
Procedural History
Petitioner was convicted under Sections 302 and 498A IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment. He was granted temporary bail on 12th March 2003 but absconded. A separate offence was registered, leading to conviction in Criminal Case No.4950 of 2003 on 23rd February 2004, confirmed in Criminal Appeal No.03 of 2008 on 22nd September 2008. The present petition was filed on an unspecified date and decided on 19th January 2026.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): 302, 498A, 224
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC): 427
- Constitution of India, 1950: 226, 227
