← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP(MD)/12716/2015ordered

S. Mariappan,(Cp No.4569), v. State Of Tamil Nadu Rep. By

2015-08-18Honourable Ms. Justice R.Mala5 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 18.08.2015

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.MALA Criminal Original Petition(MD) No.12716 of 2015 S.Mariappan : Petitioner Vs.

1.State of Tamil Nadu rep by The Secretary to Government, Home, (Prison IV) Department, Secretariat, Fort. St. George, Chennai-9.

2.The Additional Director General of Police, Egmore, Chennai-8.

3.The Inspector of Police, Thiruchencode Police Station, Namakkal District.

(Crime No.15/1992) 4.The Inspector of Police, Cumbum Police Station, Cumbum, (Crime No.533/1987) 5.The Inspector of Police, Kumuli Police Station, Theni District.

(Crime No.3 of 1999) 6.The Inspector of Police, Kodaikanal Police Station, Dindigul District.

(Crime No.253/1992) 7.The Superintendent of Police(Prison) Madurai Central Prison, Madurai.

: Respondents Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., praying to direct the respondents to permit the

petitioner that the life sentence imposed in S.C.No.115 of 2005 dated 18.07.2006 on the file of the learned Additional Sessions Court, Namakkal along with for the punishment of 7 years Rigorous imprisonment and in S.C.No.54 of 1992 dated 23.12.2005 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Court, Uthamapalayam for the 7 years Rigorous imprisonment imposed and in S.C.No.132 of 2002 dated 20.07.2006 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Court, Uthamapalayam for the punishment of 7 years Rigorous imprisonment and in S.C.No.37 of 2008 dated 02.12.2008 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Court, Palani for the punishment of 7 years Rigorous imprisonment with Rs.5,000/- fine on default of it, 1 1⁄2 years of rigorous imprisonment and for the punishment of 1 years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.

1000/- default of it, three months rigorous imprisonment and for the punishment of 7 years imprisonment and for the punishment of 7 years rigorous imprisonment with fine Rs.5000/- on default of it, 1 1⁄2 year rigorous imprisonment to run concurrently and consequently set off the period of incarceration suffered with the petitioner from 27.08.1992 to 23.02.2005 as under trial remand prisoner. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Lenin Prabu For Respondents : Mr.K.Anbarasan Government Advocate(Crl.

ORDER

The petitioner has filed the present petition to direct the respondents to permit the petitioner that the life sentence imposed in S.C.No.115 of 2005 dated 18.07.2006 on the file of the learned Additional Sessions Court, Namakkal along with for the punishment of 7 years Rigorous imprisonment and in S.C.No.54 of 1992 dated 23.12.2005 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Court, Uthamapalayam for the 7 years Rigorous imprisonment imposed and in S.C.No.132 of 2002 dated 20.07.2006 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Court, Uthamapalayam for the punishment of 7 years Rigorous imprisonment and in S.C.No.37 of 2008 dated 02.12.2008 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Court, Palani for the punishment of 7 years Rigorous imprisonment with Rs.

5,000/- fine in default of it, 1 1⁄2 years of rigorous imprisonment and for the punishment of 1 years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1000/- default of it, three months rigorous imprisonment and for the punishment of 7 years imprisonment and for the punishment of 7 years rigorous imprisonment with fine Rs.5000/- on default of it, 1 1⁄2 year rigorous imprisonment to run concurrently and consequently set off the period of incarceration suffered with the petitioner from 27.08.1992 to 23.02.2005 as under trial remand prisoner.

2. Heard both sides.

3.The petitioner has been sentenced to undergo rigorous

imprisonment in the following cases on the orders passed by the competent criminal Courts as follows:

Sl.N o Sentences Awarded Court Awarding Sentences 1.

Life sentence for the offence under Section 302 r/w. 34 I.P.C., with fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default, to undergo 2 months SI and 7 years RI for the offene under Section 394 r/w 397 I.P.C with fine of Rs.7,000/-, in default, to undergo month SI in S.C.No.115/2015 dated 18.07.2006 II Addl. Sessions Court, Namakkal 2.

7 years RI for the offence under Section 394 r/w 397 of I.P.C., in S.C.No.54 of 1992 dated 23.12.2005 Assistant Sessions Court, Uthamapalayam 3.

7 years RI for offence under Section r/w of I.P.C., in S.C.No.132/2002 dated 20.07.2006 Assistant Sessions Court, Uthamapalayam 4.

7 years RI for offence under Section 458 I.P.C with fine of Rs.5000/- in deafult, to undergo 1 1⁄2 years of RI and 1 year RI for offence under Section 342 I.P.C and 7 years SI for offence under Section 397 r/w 34 of I.P.C., and further sentence to undergo 7 years RI with fine of Rs.5000/- in default, to undergo 1 1⁄2 months RI for offence under Section 25 (1)(b) of Indian Arms Act in S.C.No.37 of 2008 dated 02.12.2008 Assistant Sessions Court, Palani.

4.At this juncture, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) would submit that as per the decision in MOHD AKHTAR HUSSIAN V ASSISTANT COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS reported in 1988 AIR 2143 , the petitioner is not entitled to get the relief as prayed for in this petition and he also filed a detailed counter. 5.Considering the submissions made on either side and also considering the fact that the petitioner is facing the above said cases and by following the judgment of this Court in K.Arasan and others v. The State of Tamil Nadu [2012(6) CTC (Cr.)510], this Court came to the conclusion that under Section 482 Cr.P.C to issue direction ordering sentence imposed in latter case on conviction to run concurrently with sentence imposed in former case as provided in Section 427 Cr.P.C., and the judgment relied upon by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) in MOHD AKHTAR HUSSIAN V ASSISTANT COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS] cited supra, is not applicable to the facts of the present case, because the offence

is one and the same, the maximum punishment is 4 years; that admittedly, the petitioner has not sought for any request at the time of imposing sentence; however, considering the nature of the case, I am of the view that the petitioner is entitled to get an order directing the sentence imposed in latter case ordered to be run concurrently in the earlier case.

6. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition is allowed and the sentence passed in S.C.No.115 of 2005, on the file of the Assistant Sessions Court, Namakkal and the sentence passed in S.C.No.54 of 1992, on the file of the Assistant Sessions Court, Uthamapalayam and the sentenced passed in S.C.No.132 of 2002 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Court, Uthamapalayam and the sentenced passed in S.C.No.37 of 2008 on the file of the Assistant Sessions Court, Palani, are ordered to run concurrently. Sd/- Assistant Registrar /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Additional Sessions Court, Namakkal.

2.The Assistant Sessions Court, Uthamapalayam.

3.The Assistant Sessions Court, Palani.

4.The Secretary to Government, State of Tamil Nadu, Home, (Prison IV) Department, Secretariat, Fort. St. George, Chennai-9.

5.The Additional Director General of Police, Egmore, Chennai-8.

6.The Inspector of Police, Thiruchencode Police Station, Namakkal District.

7.The Inspector of Police, Cumbum Police Station, Cumbum.

8.The Inspector of Police, Kumuli Police Station, Theni District.

9.The Inspector of Police, Kodaikanal Police Station, Dindigul District.

10.The Superintendent of Police(Prison) Madurai Central Prison, Madurai.

11.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

+ 1 CC TO MR.S.LENIN PRABU, ADVOCATE IN SR NO. 47914 NS TE/AN-MP/ 15/09/2015 5P/13C Order made in Crl.O.P.(MD)No.12716 of 2015 Dated:- 18.08.2015