Electricity equipment theft: Six sentences of convict to run concurrently, says Allahabad HC
The petitioner submitted that a trial court, while convicting him in all six cases on the same date, sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for one year and six months in each case. However, due to the non-exercise of discretion under Section 427(1) Cr.P.C., the sentences were directed to run consecutively, meaning a total incarceration period of nine years.
'We are of the considered view that the life and liberty of the petitioner will be jeopardised if his grievance is not redressed in this writ petition. Thus, the writ petition is allowed. The sentence of one year and six months imprisonment awarded to the petitioner in all the six session cases, shown in the chart, shall run concurrently. The fine has been deposited by the petitioner, per enclosed receipts,' the court observed.
The court said in its order, 'The Registry to inform the District Jail, Aligarh to release the petitioner- Santosh, considering the concurrent running of sentences.'
The court passed the order while hearing a petition filed by one Santosh, seeking a direction to the Superintendent, District Jail, Aligarh, for issuance of appropriate orders for concurrent running of sentences imposed in six cases arising out of theft of electricity equipment, in which the petitioner was convicted upon admission of guilt under the plea bargaining mechanism.
The court noted in its order that the counsel for the petitioner submits that the discretion provided under Section 427(1) Cr.P.C. has not been exercised by the trial Judge.
The petitioner has confessed the crime on plea bargaining, considering that in all the cases the petitioner would be released after one and half years of imprisonment, as all the cases have been lodged by the police. The non exercise of discretion of consecutive or concurrent running of sentence by the trial Judge while convicting the petitioner simultaneously in six cases led to travesty of justice and long incarceration in jail.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
a day ago
- Time of India
Allahabad HC directs Ghaziabad development body to maintain status quo on demolition notice
PRAYARGRAJ: The Allahabad High Court has directed that status quo be maintained with regards to the demolition notices issued by Ghaziabad Development Authority ( GDA ) over alleged illegal properties built on public land. Hearing a writ petition, a division bench comprising Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Justice Prashant Kumar granted time to the district administration and GDA to place on record how they intend to rehabilitate the old inhabitants of the properties. The court also restrained the petitioners from creating any third-party interests or undertaking any development on the disputed property. The court also observed, "In the facts and circumstances of the case, we also find that it is not in dispute that the petitioners have been occupying the place for the last 40-50 years." "At this stage, we find that some indulgence and reprieve is to be accorded to the inhabitants who belong to the weaker sections of society and we further direct the authorities to ensure the formulation and implementation of a rehabilitation scheme for such persons," it said. The bench said the rehabilitation scheme shall be provided by the district administration and the GDA in the next hearing. The next hearing is listed for August 22. The petitioners filed the present writ petition for quashing the demolition notice dated June 16, 2025, issued by the GDA under section 26-A of the UP Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973. The GDA initially issued notice to 172 illegal occupants of public land on September 6, 2024, which is earmarked in the master plan. Consequently, 89 persons filed their objections which were considered and the impugned order (order under challenge) was passed. During the course of hearing, the counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioners are old inhabitants and in absence of any rehabilitation scheme as per the law, the old inhabitants, who are occupying small pieces of land for their shelter and admittedly belong to the lower sections of society, will suffer irreparable loss, if uprooted. After hearing both sides, the court in its order dated July 31 passed the above directives and observed, "It is informed that in response to the earlier court's order, till date the GDA has not taken any remedial measures to rehabilitate the persons who were in illegal occupation for the last 40 years."
Time of India
2 days ago
- Time of India
DGP issues rules for arrests and personal search memos
Lucknow: Following directives from Allahabad High Court, DGP Rajeev Krishna has issued a standardised format for arrest and personal search memos. Emphasising that arrest affects an individual's constitutional right to personal liberty, the DGP said no such right can be infringed without legal process. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now As per Rule 6 of the BNSS 2023, sub-inspectors and above are now responsible for maintaining arrest records at police stations and district control rooms. A designated officer must be informed at the time of arrest, a detail now mandatory in the memo format. All information in both memos must be error-free, with a clear mention of recovered items. "The move aims to ensure transparency, accountability and adherence to legal procedures," a senior officer at the DGP headquarters said. Recently, the Allahabad HC quashed the arrest of a petitioner after finding violations of procedural safeguards under sections 50 and 50A of the CrPC (now sections 47 and 48 of the BNSS) and issued strict instructions for corrective measures. The court had observed that the arrest memo lacked a mandatory column indicating the grounds of arrest and that the magistrate failed to ensure legal aid or a proper hearing during judicial remand. Citing Supreme Court rulings, the court quashed both the arrest and remand orders. The court instructed the DGP to circulate its order to all police commissioners, SSPs and SPs for strict compliance with sections 47 and 48 of BNSS. These sections mandate that every arrested person must be informed of the reason for arrest and their right to bail. The arresting officer must inform a relative or friend of the arrested person. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The magistrate must verify compliance before granting remand. Following this, a committee constituted by the DGP reviewed the legal provisions, SC rulings and revised arrest memos issued by CBI and ED. Based on the findings, the committee prepared and attached updated formats for arrest memo and personal search memo. Key directives include that arrest memos must contain columns detailing the grounds of arrest and the right to bail. "Personal search memos must record all items seized unless a detailed seizure memo is separately prepared. Arrest information must be immediately shared with designated officers at the district control room. Investigating officers must ensure all columns in the new memo formats are filled clearly and without error," the DGP said. The DGP directed all police units to disseminate the updated memo formats and ensure strict compliance.
Hindustan Times
2 days ago
- Hindustan Times
Allahabad HC directs GDA to maintain status quo on demolition notice
Prayagraj, The Allahabad High Court has directed that status quo be maintained with regards to the demolition notices issued by Ghaziabad Development Authority over alleged illegal properties built on public land. Allahabad HC directs GDA to maintain status quo on demolition notice Hearing a writ petition, a division bench comprising Justice Mahesh Chandra Tripathi and Justice Prashant Kumar granted time to the district administration and GDA to place on record how they intend to rehabilitate the old inhabitants of the properties. The court also restrained the petitioners from creating any third-party interests or undertaking any development on the disputed property. The court also observed, "In the facts and circumstances of the case, we also find that it is not in dispute that the petitioners have been occupying the place for the last 40-50 years." "At this stage, we find that some indulgence and reprieve is to be accorded to the inhabitants who belong to the weaker sections of society and we further direct the authorities to ensure the formulation and implementation of a rehabilitation scheme for such persons," it said. The bench said the rehabilitation scheme shall be provided by the district administration and the GDA in the next hearing. The next hearing is listed for August 22. The petitioners filed the present writ petition for quashing the demolition notice dated June 16, 2025, issued by the GDA under section 26-A of the UP Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973. The GDA initially issued notice to 172 illegal occupants of public land on September 6, 2024, which is earmarked in the master plan. Consequently, 89 persons filed their objections which were considered and the impugned order was passed. During the course of hearing, the counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioners are old inhabitants and in absence of any rehabilitation scheme as per the law, the old inhabitants, who are occupying small pieces of land for their shelter and admittedly belong to the lower sections of society, will suffer irreparable loss, if uprooted. After hearing both sides, the court in its order dated July 31 passed the above directives and observed, "It is informed that in response to the earlier court's order, till date the GDA has not taken any remedial measures to rehabilitate the persons who were in illegal occupation for the last 40 years." This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
