Multiple life term sentences cannot run consecutively: SC Modifies HC order
Court modified a Punjab and Haryana High Court judgment that had ordered consecutive life terms for two murders
The Supreme Court rules that multiple life sentences must run concurrently, not consecutively
The Supreme Court, on September 17, 2025, emphasised that if multiple sentences of life imprisonment are awarded to an accused, the punishment cannot be directed to run consecutively; they can only run concurrently.
A bench of Justices Pankaj Mithal and Prasanna B Varale partly allowed an appeal filed by convict Rajesh against the Punjab and Haryana High Court's judgment of April 10, 2025.
The appellant was convicted of the murder of an adult and a minor child.
He was awarded life imprisonment in respect of both offences. However, the High Court had directed the sentences to run consecutively and not concurrently.
The counsel for the appellant submitted that when multiple sentences of life imprisonment are awarded, they have to run concurrently and not consecutively.
The counsel relied upon the Constitution Bench decision in the case of “Muthuramalingam and Ors. vs. State Represented by Inspector of Police” (2016).
Agreeing to the submission, the bench said, this court had then, in unequal terms, laid down that if multiple sentences of life imprisonment are awarded, the same cannot be directed to run consecutively; they can only run concurrently.
"In view of the facts and circumstances, the impugned judgment dated 10.04.2015 passed by the High Court is modified and the sentences awarded to the appellant for life are directed to run concurrently and not consecutively," the bench said.
In Muthuramalingam & Ors. v. State Rep. by Inspector of Police, (2016), the Supreme Court explained the practical and conceptual basis: a life sentence is imprisonment for the remainder of a convict’s natural life, so “stacking” life terms consecutively is unworkable; instead such sentences are super-imposed so one does not nullify another but they run concurrently in effect.
Court interpreted Section 31 CrPC (sentencing where there are convictions for several offences at one trial) and noted the limits on directing the order in which sentences run. While courts can make directions about the order for term sentences, directing life sentences to run consecutively defeats the meaning of “life", court said.
Case Title: Rajesh Vs State of Haryana
Judgment Date: September 17, 2025
Bench: Justices Pankaj Mithal and Prasanna B Varale