Back
GITA GOPI
PIYUSH AMBALAL PATEL - PARAS SKIN AND COSMETIC CLINIC – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Mr. Vaibhav N. Sheth, learned advocate for the applicant, submitted that the applicant has been accused no. 2 in Criminal Case No. 14997 of 2019, which was filed before the 10th Additional Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Ahmedabad (Rural) under section 138 of the N.I. Act. Advocate Mr. Sheth stated that the present applicant came to be convicted and sentenced for one year simple imprisonment under section 138 of the N.I. Act, and was ordered to deposit double the amount of cheque, which was calculated as Rs.2,11,662/- within 30 days of the order as a compensation amount. In failure to deposit the money, three months further imprisonment was ordered.
2. Advocate Mr. Sheth further submitted that accused no. 1, wife of the present applicant, was acquitted, while the present applicant has been sentenced for one year. Mr. Sheth submitted that the conviction order was passed in absence of accused no. 2, and the order dated 25.01.2023 was to the effect of bringing the accused no. 2 before the Court on issuance of non-bailable warrant.
3. Advocate Mr. Sheth submitted that an appeal was proposed to be preferred against the judgment of conviction of the Judicial Magistrate, First C
The court emphasized the importance of following procedural requirements in criminal cases, particularly regarding the execution of sentences and the rights of the accused to appeal.
The court reinforced the importance of procedural fairness in the context of appeals and the execution of warrants under the Cr.P.C.
An accused has an indefeasible right to default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. if no chargesheet is filed within the statutory period, and rights must be equally upheld among co-accused.
The court established that procedural safeguards must be adhered to in criminal proceedings, particularly the right of the accused to seek bail and the necessity of their presence during judgment pro....
(1) In bailable offence, right of accused to get bail is absolute and indefeasible right and courts have no discretion in granting bail.(2) Criminal Courts should consider bail applications particula....
The court held that the discretion to suspend a sentence post-conviction must be exercised judiciously, considering the nature of the offence and the likelihood of appeal success.
Prolonged incarceration and the likelihood of delayed hearings are key factors for granting suspension of sentence under Section 389 of the Cr.P.C., even for repeat offenders, subject to strict condi....
The court emphasizes a liberal approach to condoning delay, highlighting that procedural errors should not obstruct substantial justice when sufficient cause is shown.
The court upheld the dismissal of a complaint for want of prosecution due to the complainant's repeated absences, emphasizing the need for timely justice and the prosecution's duty to appear.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
