https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303201 Concurrent sentencing must ordinarily be decided when the later conviction and sentence are recorded, because once judgment is signed and pronounced the court cannot revisit that direction under Section 397(1). The inherent power under Section 561-A may be used only in exceptional cases to give effect to the Code, prevent abuse of process, or secure the ends of justice, and not to defeat the statutory scheme. Concurrency is justified only where the offences are connected or where failure to consider the issue would cause injustice; distinct and unrelated offences should normally run consecutively. On the facts, the applications failed because the convictions arose from separate and unconnected offences. en-us Wed, 22 May 1974 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Jul 2022 12:19:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303201 Concurrent sentencing must ordinarily be decided when the later conviction and sentence are recorded, because once judgment is signed and pronounced the court cannot revisit that direction under Section 397(1). The inherent power under Section 561-A may be used only in exceptional cases to give effect to the Code, prevent abuse of process, or secure the ends of justice, and not to defeat the statutory scheme. Concurrency is justified only where the offences are connected or where failure to consider the issue would cause injustice; distinct and unrelated offences should normally run consecutively. On the facts, the applications failed because the convictions arose from separate and unconnected offences. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 22 May 1974 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303201