1. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties and perused the record.

2. This Revision Application has been initiated pursuant to direction in judgment and order dated 8.3.2006 in Special Civil Application No.3133 of 1994 between Oilabhai M. Vasava v. State of Gujarat wherein paragraph Nos.7 and 8 are relevant which reads as under:

“7. In the above facts and circumstances, since the petitioner is not even alleged to be a hardened criminal or criminal offender and since death of his father was ex facie caused by an atrocious act of violence, without the details of which charge-sheet against the accused could not have been filed, and since the respondents were required to find that in an ? immediate enquiry? and had admittedly failed in doing so, the petitioner was entitled to the assistance envisaged by the aforesaid Government Resolutions dated 16.10.1982 and 4.5.1991. The un-consolable delay in reaching out to the victim and denying assistance at the time when it was most needed, also entitles the petitioner to receive the amount with interest and costs. It is also necessary, and in the interest of justice, to have the judgment of the Sessions Court, Bharuch camp at Rajpipla in Special Atrocity Case No. 64 of 1993, reviewed by this Court in exercise of its Suo motu power of revision under the provisions of Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

8. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to pay to the petitioner, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of writ of this order, the sum of rupees one lakh with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from 1.4.1994 to 31.3.2006. In case of further delay in payment, the total amount of compensation and interest incurred till 31.3.2006 shall carry penal interest at the rate of 12% p.a. Out of the total amount payable to the petitioner under this judgment, the sum of Rs. 60,000/shall be paid to the petitioner by cheque in his name and the remaining amount shall be deposited in a post office monthly income scheme for such term and in such post office as may be suggested by the petitioner. A copy of the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bharuch in Special Atrocity Case No. 64 of 1993 shall be placed along with the copy of this judgment before the Court taking up criminal revision applications for appropriate orders.”

3. Pursuant to such direction, the Registry has initiated such Revision Application as Suo Motu Revision by this Court considering that the acquittal of respondent Nos.2 t 5 by impugned judgment delivered in November, 1997 in Special Atrocity Case No.64 of 1993 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bharuch results into material irregularity and illegality.

4. It is undisputed fact that such Special Civil Application was filed by son of the victim against the State for compensation wherein while awarding the compensation, the Court has felt that there is material irregularity/illegality in judgment by the Sessions Court and, therefore, pursuant to powers vested under Section 397 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (For short ‘the Cr.P.C.’) the order is required to be scrutinized in such Revision Petition.

5. It is also undisputed fact that in such Sessions case, respondent Nos.2 to 5 herein were accused. However, at present, probably respondent no.2 is no more but in absence of appropriate evidence to confirm such fact, it would be difficult to confirm his status. However, when there is disclosure as back as on 6.1.2016 by learned APP that they want time to get Death Certificate of respondent No.2, there is reason to believe that probably respondent no.2 may not be alive.

6. Though minute factual details are avoided to be discussed for the simple reason that matter is required to be remanded back to the Sessions Court for reconsideration, basic facts of the case may be recollected as under:

6.1 The respondent Nos.2 to 5 were tried by the Sessions Court, Bharuch at camp Rajpipla in Special Atrocity Case No.64/1