On a fair reading of Section 427 of CrPC, when a person who is already undergoing a sentence of imprisonment is sentenced on a subsequent conviction to imprisonment or imprisonment for life, such imprisonment or imprisonment for life shall commence at expiration of imprisonment to which he has been previously sentenced. However, there is an exception – Court directs concurrency. There is one other exception – as per Section 427(2) – when a person already undergoing a sentence of imprisonment for life is sentenced on a subsequent conviction to imprisonment for life, subsequent sentence shall run concurrently with such previous sentence.
Mohd. Akhtar Hussain v. Assistant Collector of Customs (Prevention), Ahmedabad, (1988) 4 SCC 183 observed, in consecutive sentences, in particular, Court cannot afford to be blind to imprisonment which accused is already undergoing. However, discretion exercised to direct concurrency will have to be exercised on sound principles and not on whims [Neera Yadav v. Central Bureau of Investigation, (2017) 8 SCC 757].
– Hon’ble Justice M. R. Shah, Mohd. Zahid v. State, [Criminal Appeal No. 1457 of 2021].
History of this Court indicates, it is in seemingly small and routine matters involving grievances of citizens, issues of moment, both in jurisprudential and constitutional terms, emerge.
– Hon’ble Chief Justice of India, Hon’ble Justice Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, Iqram v. State of Uttar Pradesh, [Criminal Appeal No. 2319 of 2022] decided on 16.12.2022.