TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1988 (8) TMI 99
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....entencing practice as to concurrent or consecutive sentences. 3. The essential facts can be stated in summary form as follows : "Appellant - Mohd. Akhtar Hussain alias Ibrahim Ahmad Bhatti is a Pakistani national. On 15 April, 1982, the gold 7,000 tolas of foreign mark of the value of Rs. 1.4 crores was seized from his possession at Ahmedabad. Later he was arrested. On 23 September, a case was filed in the Court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad in CC No. 1674 of 1982. He was charged under Section 85(1)(ii) of the Gold (Control) Act, 1968. He pleaded guilty to the charge. On 11 January, 1984 he was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for 7 years and fine of Rs. 10 lakhs. It is the maximum punishment prescribed under the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e not paid, further sentence of R.I. for six months more. This sentence is to be undergone on expiration of sentence in CrI. Case No. 1674/82. Accused is found guilty under Section 120(B) of Indian Penal Code, but no separate sentence is ordered, for the same." 6. The reasons given in support of the above conclusion are : "It is not proper to pass order only by taking the circumstances and difficulties of the accused. Simultaneously, midway should be found looking to the circumstances of the nation and personal circumstances of the accused. It is not possible to order sentence of both the cases of the accused, to run concurrently. When the accused in previous case, was ordered to undergo sentence of seven years R.I. then, in this case....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... life shall commence at the expiration of the imprisonment to which he has been previously sentenced, unless the Court directs that the subsequent sentence shall run concurrently with such previous sentence. xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx." 9. The Section relates to administration of criminal justice and provides procedure for sentencing. The sentencing court is, therefore, required to consider and make an appropriate order as to how the sentence passed in the subsequent case is to run. Whether it should be concurrent or consecutive? 10. The basic rule of thumb over the years has been the so called single transaction rule for concurrent sentences. If a given transaction constitutes two offences under two enactments generally, it is wrong ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... The question, however, remains to be considered is whether the maximum sentence under the Customs Act is warranted? Whether, in the circumstances, it is wrong in principle to sentence the same offender for another maximum imprisonment? 14. It is argued that the High Court has failed to take into consideration the total period of sentence which the appellant has to undergo. It is also argued that since the conviction was based on the plea of guilty the appellant should have been given a credit in the sentence. The personal problems of appellant are also highlighted for reduction in the sentence. 15. The High Court has refused to take into consideration the merciful plea of the appellant and much less than plea of guilty. The enormity ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e credit to an accused for pleading guilty to the charge. But no credit need be given if the plea of guilty in the circumstance is inevitable or the accused has no alternative but to plead guilty. The accused being caught red handed is one such instance. The first case under the Gold (Control) Act against the appellant falls into the latter category. 7,000 tolas of Gold of foreign mark of the value of Rs. 1.4 crores were seized from the possession of appellant. The plea of guilty in that case was inevitable. The Court was, therefore, justified in awarding the maximum sentence. But the second case under the Customs Act was not of that type. Here the prosecution has to prove many things. There are 18 other accused facing the trial in the same....