JUDGMENT M. S. Sonak, J. - Heard Mr. T. George John, learned counsel for the Petitioner. Mr. J. Ramaiya appears for Respondent No.1 and Mr. Nagvekar, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for Respondent No.2. 2. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith at the request and with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. 3. The substantive relief in this petition in prayer clause (a) reads as follows :- ''(a) It is therefore prayed that this Hon''ble High Court may kindly pass order in this Criminal Writ Petition that substantive punishment in all three cases will go concurrently : (1) C.C. No.850/OA/NIA/2008/C,JMFC, Ponda Goa, (2) C.C. No.59/OA/NIA/2008/C, JMFC, Ponda Goa, (3) C.C. No.81/OA/NIA/2007/C, JMFC, Ponda Goa. And default case goes consecutively.'' 4. The learned counsel for the parties are agreed that the issue raised in this petition stands covered in favour of the Petitioner by virtue of the decision of this Court in Krishna Venkatesh and Another Vs Balbhim Malvankar and others in Criminal Writ Petition No.169 of 2019 decided on 11 th September, 2019. 5. Accordingly, by following the decision in Krishna Venkatesh (supra), we dispose of this petition by directing that the substantive sentences in Criminal Case Nos. 850/OA/NIA/2008/C, 59/OA/NIA/2008/C and 81/OA/NIA/2007/C will run concurrently. However, in so far as in default sentence is concerned, the same, will run consecutively, in case, the Petitioner default in payment of fine. 6. Rule is accordingly made absolute in the aforesaid terms. There shall be no order as to costs. 7. All concerned to act on the basis of the authenticated copy of this order.