Supreme Court of India
Raju Shantaram Koli v. The State of Maharashtra
Published on this website
Criminal Appeal Nos. 5072 and 5073 of 2026; arising from SLP (Crl.) Nos. 8535 of 2025 and 20839 of 2026
Citation: 2026 INSC 1161; reportable
Background
Background
In Raju Shantaram Koli, India’s Supreme Court set aside consecutive life sentences, preserved the convictions and clarified the separate effect of remission.
The trial court imposed life sentences for murder and sexual offences and directed consecutive service. The Bombay High Court affirmed that order in 2016. A later writ petition sought concurrency; a separate Supreme Court appeal directly challenged the original sentencing direction.
Legal questions
Legal questions
Can multiple life sentences imposed in a single trial run consecutively?
Court holding
What the Court decided
Multiple life sentences for offences in a single trial cannot run consecutively. They are superimposed over each other; remission or commutation of one does not automatically extend to the other.
Final outcome
Final outcome
Criminal Appeal No. 5073 of 2026 partly allowed on the consecutive-life-sentence direction; convictions and remaining operative order maintained. Criminal Appeal No. 5072 of 2026 disposed of as infructuous.
Practical effect
What the decision means in practice
The consecutive-service direction was removed. The convictions, life sentences and remaining operative directions remain; no immediate release was ordered.
This summary states the immediate effect recorded in the decision. The original judgment and the facts of the particular case remain controlling.
Key legal principles
Key legal principles
- Multiple life sentences imposed for offences in a single trial cannot run consecutively.
- Life imprisonment ordinarily extends to the remainder of natural life, subject to lawful remission or commutation.
- The life sentences are superimposed; relief concerning one does not automatically discharge the other.
- The Court did not decide whether concurrency could have been ordered in writ jurisdiction.
New judgment alerts
Follow this court or legal topic
Receive new judgments and analysis about Supreme Court of India, Criminal Law by email.
Primary source
Original judgment and official source
This HTML summary does not replace the court record. Use the linked original judgment PDF or official court source to verify the exact text and directions.
Later treatment
Later treatment
Pinpoint research
Exact paragraph and citation links
Each numbered entry has a permanent link, a ready-to-copy pinpoint citation, and the corresponding page of the certified judgment. The short descriptions are editorial research aids; verify the Court's exact wording in the PDF.
Judgment of Justice K.V. Viswanathan5 paragraphs
Writ-jurisdiction question left undecided
The direct challenge to the earlier appellate judgment made it unnecessary to decide the writ route.
Life sentences cannot run consecutively
Applies Muthuramalingam to multiple life sentences in a single trial.
Direct sentencing appeal partly allowed
Removes the consecutive-service direction and maintains the remainder of the order.
Separate effect of remission preserved
Life sentences are superimposed and relief on one does not automatically remit the other.
Writ-related appeal infructuous
The separate writ-related challenge no longer requires decision.
Research tools
Use this judgment in your research
Copy a link to a specific part
Judgment text is provided for legal research and general information. Verify the official court record before relying on it in proceedings.
Related article
Related article
In Raju Shantaram Koli, India’s Supreme Court set aside consecutive life sentences, preserved the convictions and clarified the separate effect of remission.
Read the related article →