The Supreme Court has held that when sentences are directed to run concurrently, an accused cannot be required to pay separate fines for each offence, as fine forms part of the overall punishment under the Indian Penal Code.

The observation was made by a bench comprising Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice N. V. Anjaria while granting relief to an appellant who was directed to pay separate fines for offences under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

The Court clarified that a fine is included as a component of punishment under Section 53 of the IPC and therefore cannot be imposed in a manner that effectively doubles the penalty when imprisonment sentences are ordered to run concurrently.

Quoting the bench, the Court observed:

“Section 53, IPC also includes fine as a punishment to be part of sentence. In that view when the sentence is directed to run concurrently, the appellant cannot be made to pay fine twice.”

Based on this reasoning, the Court set aside the requirement of paying separate fines for the offences that were ordered to run concurrently.

The ruling reinforces the principle that sentencing must remain consistent and proportionate, and that concurrent sentences should not result in multiple financial penalties for the same set of convictions.

The Supreme Court has also taken a strict approach in matters involving illegal construction and demolition of unauthorized structures