In Brief
Two appellants convicted of kidnapping, abduction, and rape of a 13-year-old girl in 2008 sought review of their sentences. The Trial Court sentenced them to 5, 7, and 10 years imprisonment respectively but failed to specify whether sentences run concurrently or consecutively, resulting in a claimed 22-year total. The Supreme Court held that courts must expressly specify concurrent or consecutive running; absence of specification means sentences run consecutively by law. However, invoking Article 142 in view of the appellants' 13+ years already served, absence of adverse conduct, and disproportionality, the Court capped maximum imprisonment at 14 years instead of 22 years, partly allowing the appeal."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.