IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Crl MC No. 176 of 2007(B)
1. KALATHIL RIYAS, S/O.ZUBAIR, C.NO.1916,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :ADV.ARUN B VARGHESE(STATE BRIEF)
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :26/03/2007
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
-------------------------------------------------
CRL.M.C.NO. 176 OF 2007
-------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 26th day of March, 2007
ORDER
This petition, registered under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C. as
a Crl.M.C., has been submitted by the petitioner – a prisoner
in custody. His grievance is that he has not been given proper
set off to which he is entitled to under Sec.428 of the Cr.P.C.
Assistance of a legal aid counsel was sought. Advocate Mr.
Arun B. Varghese has offered assistance to this Court.
2. Report of the Superintendent, Central Prison, Kannur,
was called for and in the report dated 26/2/07, the
Superintendent has given details of the convictions, set off and
the balance period for which the petitioner will have to
undergo imprisonment. It shows that the petitioner will have
to be in prison till 7/4/07 if the fine amount is paid by him or
till 7/10/07 if the fine amount is not paid by him. The learned
counsel Mr.Arun B. Varghese requested that records may be
called for. The relevant records have been called for. The
records have been perused. It is now confirmed by the
counsel that the details given in the report of the
CRL.M.C.NO. 176 OF 2007 -: 2 :-
Superintendent of Central Prison are correct and due and
eligible set off has been granted.
3. The learned counsel finally prays that the discretion
under Sec.427 of the Cr.P.C. may be invoked and there may be a
direction that the sentences imposed in different cases in which
the petitioner has been found guilty and convicted may be
directed to run concurrently.
4. I do not find any satisfactory reason to invoke the
discretion at this stage by invoking the powers under Sec.482 of
the Cr.P.C. The offences are all distinct and separate.
Concurrency has been given in each case wherever admissible.
I am, in these circumstances, not persuaded to agree that this is
a fit case where concurrency under Sec.427 of the Cr.P.C. can or
ought to be granted.
5. In the result, this Crl.M.C. is dismissed.
6. A copy of this order shall be communicated to the
petitioner in prison by the Registry and his acknowledgment
shall be obtained.
Sd/-
(R. BASANT, JUDGE)
Nan/
//true copy// P.S. To Judge