Different criminal cases

Grievance of accused was that convictions and sentences awarded to him in different criminal cases were being treated as consecutive and not concurrent

Validity

Order regarding running of sentences of accused either consecutive or concurrently should be passed at the time of deciding case or deciding appeal and if for any reason or due to some inadvertent mistake the same was not passed, the matter could be settled by invoking jurisdiction of High Court

Categorical mandatory proviso to S. 35(2), Cr.P.C. provided that in no way sentences should not exceed for a longer period of fourteen years

Sentences of accused running consecutively would not serve interest of justice, rather the same would be contrary to the law

High Court directed that sentences passed against accused in different cases to run concurrently and also to consider period of detention undergone by accused in connection with other criminal case

Petition was allowed accordingly.