Bombay High Court Allows Concurrency of Sentences Under Section 427(2) CrPC for Prisoner Serving Life Imprisonment. Previous Sentence of Seven Years Directed to Run Concurrently with Life Sentence for Offence Committed Prior to First Conviction.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: AURANGABAD In Favour of Accused

Admin

2026-05-18 14:22:59

Font size:

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Kailas Shankar Navekar, was convicted in Sessions Case No. 100/2006 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Beed, for offences under Sections 363, 376, and 506 IPC, and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years with fine. Subsequently, he was convicted in Sessions Case No. 04/2007 (confirmed in Criminal Appeal No. 672/2008) and sentenced to life imprisonment. The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking a direction to treat the sentences concurrently under Section 427(2) CrPC, and for recalculation of his sentence for premature release. The court examined the issue of whether a previous sentence can run concurrently with a subsequent life sentence. The court noted that Section 427(2) CrPC applies when a person already undergoing a sentence is convicted of another offence committed prior to the first conviction. The court held that the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of concurrency, as the subsequent life sentence was for an offence committed before the first conviction. The court directed the respondents to treat the sentences as running concurrently and to recalculate the sentence accordingly, and if the petitioner has completed the requisite period, to consider his premature release. The petition was allowed with directions.

Headnote

A) Criminal Procedure - Sentencing - Concurrency of Sentences - Section 427(2) CrPC - The petitioner, convicted in Sessions Case No. 100/2006 for offences under Sections 363, 376, 506 IPC and sentenced to 7 years RI, was later convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment in Sessions Case No. 04/2007. The court held that the previous sentence must run concurrently with the life sentence under Section 427(2) CrPC, as the subsequent conviction was for an offence committed while the petitioner was already undergoing the previous sentence. The court directed the authorities to treat the sentences concurrently and recalculate the sentence for premature release. (Paras 3-10)

Issue of Consideration

Whether a prisoner convicted and sentenced in a previous trial is entitled to have that sentence run concurrently with a life sentence awarded in a subsequent trial under Section 427(2) CrPC.

Final Decision

The petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to treat the sentences awarded to the petitioner in Sessions Case No. 100/2006 and Sessions Case No. 04/2007 as running concurrently under Section 427(2) CrPC, and to recalculate the sentence accordingly. If the petitioner has undergone the requisite period, he shall be released forthwith unless required in any other case.

Law Points

Section 427(2) CrPC
concurrency of sentences
life imprisonment
previous conviction
subsequent conviction

Case Details

2026:BHC-AUG:14177-DB

Criminal Writ Petition No. 1657 of 2025

2026-04-02

Sandipkumar C. More, Abasaheb D. Shinde

2026:BHC-AUG:14177-DB

Mr. Kiran D. Jadhav, Mr. P.K. Lakhotiya

Kailas Shankar Navekar

The State of Maharashtra, The Inspector General of Prisons, The Superintendent, Central Jail Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking direction for concurrency of sentences and premature release.

Remedy Sought

Direction to treat sentences in Sessions Case No. 100/2006 and Sessions Case No. 04/2007 as running concurrently under Section 427(2) CrPC, and for recalculation of sentence and premature release.

Filing Reason

The petitioner was convicted in two separate trials and sought concurrency of sentences to be eligible for premature release.

Previous Decisions

Conviction in Sessions Case No. 100/2006 on 29.04.2008 for 7 years RI; conviction in Sessions Case No. 04/2007 (confirmed in Criminal Appeal No. 672/2008) for life imprisonment.

Issues

Whether the petitioner is entitled to have the sentence in Sessions Case No. 100/2006 run concurrently with the life sentence in Sessions Case No. 04/2007 under Section 427(2) CrPC.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that the subsequent life sentence was for an offence committed prior to the first conviction, thus Section 427(2) CrPC applies. Respondent State opposed, but the court found merit in petitioner's submission.

Ratio Decidendi

Under Section 427(2) CrPC, when a person already undergoing a sentence is convicted of another offence committed prior to the first conviction, the subsequent sentence shall run concurrently with the previous sentence. The court applied this principle to direct concurrency of a previous 7-year sentence with a subsequent life sentence.

Judgment Excerpts

The issue involved in this Writ Petition is whether the petitioner who has been convicted and directed to undergo a term sentence(s) in previous trial is entitled for a benefit of running the said sentence concurrently with the sentence of life imprisonment awarded in subsequent trial. All these sentences were directed to be run concurrently by giving the benefit of set-off under Section 428 of CrPC.

Procedural History

The petitioner was convicted in Sessions Case No. 100/2006 on 29.04.2008 and sentenced to 7 years RI. He was later convicted in Sessions Case No. 04/2007 (confirmed in Criminal Appeal No. 672/2008) and sentenced to life imprisonment. He filed the present writ petition seeking concurrency of sentences.