Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.97 seconds)

V.K.Bansal vs State Of Haryana & Ors.Etc.Etc on 5 July, 2013

13. Though this provision has fallen for scrutiny of this Court umpteen times, we can profitably refer to one of the recent pronouncements in V.K. Bansal v. State of Haryana where it was held that though it is manifest from Section 427(1), that the Court has the power and discretion to issue a direction that a subsequent sentence shall run concurrently with the previous sentences, the very nature of the power so conferred, predicates that the discretion, would have to be exercised along judicial lines or not in a mechanical or pedantic manner. It was underlined that there is no cut and dried formula for the court to follow, in the exercise of such power and that the justifiability or otherwise of the same, would depend on the nature of the offence or offences committed and
Supreme Court of India Cites 10 - Cited by 155 - T S Thakur - Full Document

Mulaim Singh vs State on 22 May, 1974

13. There are also cases where the High Courts have depending upon whether facts forming the basis of prosecution arise out of a single transaction or transactions that are akin to each other directed that the sentences awarded should run concurrently. As for instance the High Court of Allahabad has in Mulaim Singh v. State [1974 Cri LJ 1397 (All)] directed the sentence to run concurrently since the nature of the offence and the transactions thereto were akin to each other. Suffice it to say that the discretion vested in the Court for a direction in terms of Section 427 can and ought to be exercised having regard to the nature of the offence committed and the facts situation, in which the question arises.
Allahabad High Court Cites 17 - Cited by 20 - Full Document

Mohd. Akhtar Hussain Alias Ibrahim ... vs Assistant Collector Of Customs ... on 31 August, 1988

In Madan Lal case [State of Punjab v. Madan Lal, (2009) 5 SCC 238 : (2009) 2 SCC (Cri) 650] this Court relied upon the decision in Akhtar Hussain case [(1988) 4 SCC 183 : 1988 SCC (Cri) 921] and affirmed the direction of the High Court for the sentences to run concurrently. That too was a case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The State was aggrieved of the direction that the sentences shall run concurrently and had appealed to this Court against the same. This Court, however, declined interference with the order passed by the High Court and upheld the direction issued by the High Court.
Supreme Court of India Cites 9 - Cited by 174 - K J Shetty - Full Document

State Of Punjab vs Madan Lal on 5 March, 2009

In Madan Lal case [State of Punjab v. Madan Lal, (2009) 5 SCC 238 : (2009) 2 SCC (Cri) 650] this Court relied upon the decision in Akhtar Hussain case [(1988) 4 SCC 183 : 1988 SCC (Cri) 921] and affirmed the direction of the High Court for the sentences to run concurrently. That too was a case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The State was aggrieved of the direction that the sentences shall run concurrently and had appealed to this Court against the same. This Court, however, declined interference with the order passed by the High Court and upheld the direction issued by the High Court.
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 95 - A Pasayat - Full Document
1   2 Next