Concurrent sentences under Section 427 CrPC remain exceptional where narcotic convictions arise from separate transactions and judgments.

Section 427 CrPC treats consecutive running of a later sentence as the general rule, while concurrency remains a discretionary exception to be exercised on sound principles having regard to the nature of the offence and the facts. Where convictions arise from different transactions, separate crime numbers and distinct judgments, the ordinary position is that sentences run consecutively unless the court specifically directs otherwise. As the narcotic offences arose from separate recoveries and separate NDPS convictions, and no order of concurrency had been made, the request for concurrent running of sentences was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the sentences imposed in two separate trials for distinct narcotic offences could be directed to run concurrently under Section 427 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Analysis: Section 427 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 lays down the general rule that a sentence on subsequent conviction runs consecutively after the earlier sentence, unless the Court directs concurrency. Concurrency is an exception and depends on judicial discretion exercised on sound principles having regard to the nature of the offence and the facts of the case. Where the convictions arise from different transactions, different crime numbers, and different judgments, the normal rule is consecutive running of sentences unless there is a specific order directing otherwise. The offences here arose from separate transactions involving different recoveries and separate convictions under the NDPS Act, and no order had been passed directing concurrency. In the context of serious NDPS offences, the discretion under Section 427 was not considered fit to be exercised in favour of the accused.

Conclusion: The claim for concurrent running of sentences was rejected and the sentences were held not to run concurrently.

---