Breaking SUPREME COURT CRACKS DOWN ON HOME LOAN SUBVENTION FRAUD: CBI PROBE EXPEDITED, 30-DAY SANCTION DEADLINE FOR BANK OFFICIALS
New Delhi · Friday, 07 August 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2019-02-14 partly_allowed

Gagan Kumar vs State of Punjab

Bench: 2 — Abhay Manohar Sapre

In Brief

Gagan Kumar was convicted under Sections 279 and 304A of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to six months and two years rigorous imprisonment respectively. The Judicial Magistrate failed to specify whether these sentences would run concurrently or consecutively, as mandated by Section 31 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The High Court dismissed the revision petition without correcting this procedural error. The Supreme Court partly allowed the appeal, upholding the conviction but modifying the sentences to run concurrently, finding the omission was a legal deficiency that should have been corrected by lower courts.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Criminal Procedure Sentencing Multiple Offences Concurrent vs Consecutive Sentences

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login