In Brief
This case involved two murder convictions of the same appellant under separate FIRs. The trial court sentenced him to life imprisonment in both cases with a 30-year cap on remission, directing sentences to run consecutively. The High Court affirmed the convictions but modified sentences to run concurrently and reduced the term to time already served. The Supreme Court held the High Court's subsequent correction order exceeded its jurisdiction and was not a typographical error. The Court upheld the conviction and reinstated life imprisonment with the 30-year remission cap, but directed sentences to run concurrently—not consecutively—as multiple life sentences cannot logically run consecutively since a person has only one life.", "summary_100">This case involved two murder convictions of the same appellant under separate FIRs. The trial court sentenced him to life imprisonment in both cases with a 30-year cap on remission, directing sentences to run consecutively. The High Court affirmed the convictions but modified sentences to run concurrently and reduced the term to time already served. The Supreme Court held the High Court's subsequent correction order exceeded its jurisdiction and was not a typographical error. The Court upheld the conviction and reinstated life imprisonment with the 30-year remission cap, but directed sentences to run concurrently—not consecutively—as multiple life sentences cannot logically run consecutively since a person has only one life.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.