SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2011 Supreme(Guj) 224

2011 (2) GCD 1423 (Guj)
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Z.K. Saiyed
Jangubhai Bhotiabhai Rathva
Versus
State of Gujarat
Criminal Appeal No. 2607 of 2009—Decided on 05/04/2011

Advocates:
Appearance :
Mr. Hardik A. Dave, for the Appellant No. 1.
Mr H.L Jani, Ld. Addl. Public Prosecutor, for the Opponent No. 1.

Point in Issue :
Whether appellant is entitled to reduction of period of sentence awarded to him.

Headnote:

Bombay Police Act - Section 135 - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 307,504 - Arms Act, 1959, Section 25 (1)(a) - Appeal against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, whereby Judge has convicted the appellant-accused for the offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years, and also imposed fine and in default of payment of fine, sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of six months - Appellant has also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 25(1)(a) of the Arms Act and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months, and also imposed fine, and in default of payment of fine; sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of one month - However, the appellant was acquitted from the offence punishable under Section 504 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 40 of the Arms Act and under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act - Held, case has been proved beyond reasonable doubt - No grave error committed by Trial Judge - Further held that the sentence imposed held is harsh therefore reduced to 5 years instead of seven years - Appeal allowed

Judgment

Z.K. Saiyed J.—The appellant has preferred the present appeal against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 24th December, 2009 passed by the learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Vadodara at Camp Chhotaudaipur, in Sessions Case No. 70 of 2008, whereby the learned Judge has convicted the appellant-accused for the offence punishable under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years, and also imposed fine of Rs.1,000/-, and in default of payment of fine, sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of six months. The appellant has also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 25(1)(a) of the Arms Act and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months, and also imposed fine of Rs.500/-, and in default of payment of fine; sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of one month. However, the appellant was acquitted from the offence punishable under Section 504 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 40 of the Arms Act and under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act.

2. It is the case of the prosecution that on 20th May, 2008 at village Zaab, the complainant and other persons were sitting in open space just opposite to the house of Bhagubhai Bavabhai Rathava. It is the case of the prosecution that at that point of time, the present appellant and other accused persons came there and abused the complainant and other persons. It is further the case of the prosecution that thereafter the appellant had came there with gun in his hand and the other two accused persons had came there with stick and sword in their hand and thereby the appellant fired the arms four times. Because of firing, the complainant and other persons got injured.

3. Therefore, a complaint to the said effect was registered by the complainant with Karali Police Station. Thereafter, as the sufficient evidence found, the accused persons came to be chargesheeted before the Court of Chhotaudaipur. Thereafter, as the case was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the same was transferred to the Court of Sessions.

4. Thereafter, charge came to be framed at Exhibit 4 against the accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 504 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 30 of the Arms Act. Thereafter, as the accused persons pleaded not guilty to the charge framed against them, trial commenced.

5. Thereafter, the prosecution has produced oral as well as documentary evidence on record in support of their case. Prosecution has examined 13 witnesses and also produced 18 documentary evidence on record.

6. Thereafter, after filing closing pursis by the prosecution, under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 further statements of the accused persons were recorded. Neither the accused had examined defence witnesses nor the accused had given any evidence on oath.

7. After hearing both the sides, the learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Vadodara at Camp Chhotaudaipur, by his judgment and order of conviction dated 24th December, 2009 passed in Sessions Case No. 70 of 2008, convicted the appellant as stated above. The learned trial Judge was pleased to acquit the original accused Nos.2 and 3 from the charges levelled against them.

8. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said judgment and order of conviction dated 24th December, 2009 passed by the learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Vadodara at Camp Chhotaudaipur in Sessions Case No. 70 of 2008, the appellant here-in-above has preferred the present Criminal Appeal before this Hon’ble Court.

9. I have heard Mr. Hardik A. Dave, learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr. H.L. Jani, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent-State.

10. Mr. Dave has taken me through the evidence of prosecution witnesses and the documentary evidence and submitted that from the evidence produced on record it i




Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top