SC: Public Premises Act Prevails over State Rent Laws For Evicting Unauthorised Occupants  ||  SC: Doctors Were Unwavering Heroes in COVID-19, and Their Sacrifice Remains Indelible  ||  SC Sets Up Secondary Medical Board to Assess Passive Euthanasia Plea of Man in Vegetative State  ||  NCLAT: Amounts Listed As ‘Other Advances’ in Company’s Balance Sheet aren’t Financial Debt under IBC  ||  NCLT Ahmedabad: Objections to Coc Cannot Bar RP From Challenging Preferential Transactions  ||  J&K&L HC: Courts Should Exercise Caution When Granting Interim Relief in Public Infrastructure Cases  ||  Bombay HC: SARFAESI Sale Invalid if Sale Certificate is Not Issued Prior to IBC Moratorium  ||  Supreme Court: Police May Freeze Bank Accounts under S.102 CrPC in Prevention of Corruption Cases  ||  SC: Arbitrator’s Mandate Ends on Time Expiry; Substituted Arbitrator Must Continue After Extension  ||  SC: Woman May Move Her Department’s ICC For Harassment by Employee of Another Workplace    

Muthuramalingam and Ors. v. State - (Supreme Court) (01 Jan 1900)

Multiple life imprisonment sentences to not run consecutively

MANU/SC/0783/2016

Criminal

A constitution bench of the Supreme Court held that though multiple sentences for life imprisonment can be awarded for multiple crimes, the same cannot be directed to run consecutively. The bench specifically overruled decisions that directed life sentences to run consecutively, either with life or other sentences.

The Supreme Court was faced with the question whether consecutive life sentences can be awarded to persons found guilty of a series of murders, all of which they were found guilty for in a single trial.The appellants were sentenced to of life imprisonment for each of the murders committed, with the sentences set to run consecutively. Sentences ranged from two to eight consecutive sentences.

Though the court disagreed with the approach of lower courts, there was consolation in its reiteration that the multiple sentences would nevertheless be “super imposed”. As such, remission or commutation under once sentence would not automatically entitle a prisoner to release from the other sentences.

Relevant : Dalabir Singh v. State of Punjab MANU/SC/0099/1979 Laxman Naskar v. Union of India MANU/SC/0084/2000 Ravindra Trimbak Chouthmal v. State of Maharashtra MANU/SC/1141/1996

Tags : MURDER   SENTENCE   LIFE IMPRISONMENT   CONSECUTIVE  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved