Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Guj) 1842

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
ILESH J. VORA, P. M. RAVAL, JJ.
State Of Gujarat - Appellant
Versus
Sanjay Alias Harpalsinh Alias Sango Virakmsinh Zala & Ors. - Respondent
Criminal Appeal (For Enhancement) No. 1401 of 2013 With Criminal Appeal No. 1195, 1203, 1255, 1412, 1421 zof 2013
Decided On : 03-09-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr Pranav Daghat APP
For the Respondent: HCLS Committee, Mr S M Vatsa, Mr.Mrudul M Barot

Court can consider compromise in non-compoundable offences when fixing the quantum of sentence, reducing it as per mutual agreement of the parties.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure - Sections 377, 378(1)(3), 324, 326, 148 IPC - Appeals against conviction and acquittal - The Court considered the facts leading to the quarrel among the accused and complainant and noted that they entered into a compromise, reflecting that there was no longer any animosity between the parties. The sentencing was adjusted in light of the compromise while upholding the convictions under non-compoundable offences, leading to reduced quantum of sentence based on precedents. (Paras 13-17)

(B) Compromise in non-compoundable offences - The Court deliberated upon the legal implications of compromise in the context of severe charges, advising that while the offences remain non-compoundable, the compromise can influence sentencing, thereby reducing sentences for the accused to the time already undergone while maintaining the fines imposed. (Paras 14-18)

Table of Content
1. the state appeals against the original accused for sentence enhancement. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
2. factual background of the case and details of the original complaint registered. (Para 7 , 8)
3. defense argues for settlement and withdraw of the appeal. (Para 9)
4. court explores the implications of compromise on non-compoundable offences. (Para 12 , 13)
5. final decision on appeals and closing remarks. (Para 18 , 19)

JUDGMENT :

(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL)

1. Criminal Appeal no. 1401 of 2013 is filed by the State of Gujarat against original Accused namely Sanjay @ Harpalsinh @ Sango Vikramsinh Zala, Indrajitsinh @ Chakabhai Pravinsinh Vala, Digvijaysinh @ Lalubhai Pravinsinh Vala and Ashok Kalpnath Mishra under Section 377 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the “CRPC”) for enhancement of sentence under Section 324, 326 read with Section 148 of the IPC vide judgment and order dated 30.07.2013 passed by the Ld. Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 2, Ahmedabad city in Sessions case No. 346 of 2005 with Sessions Case No. 368 of 2005.

2. Criminal Appeal No. 1412 of 2013 is filed by the State of Gujarat against original Accused Sanjay @ Harpalsinh @ Sango Vikramsinh Zala, Indrajitsinh @ Chakabhai Pravinsinh Vala, Digvijaysinh @ Lalubhai Pravinsinh Vala and Ashok Kalpnath Mishra under Section 378 (1)(3) of the CRPC against the acquittal under Section 307, 325,452,427,397 and 506(1) read with Section 149 of the IPC vide judgment and order dated 30.07.2013 passed by the Ld. Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 2, Ahmedabad city in Sessions case No. 346 of 2005 with Sessions Case No. 368 of 2005.

3. Criminal Appeal No. 1421 of 2013 is filed by original complainant Shivpratap Rakshpalsinh Bhadoriya against Sanjay @ Harpalsinh @ Sango Vikramsinh Zala, Indrajitsinh @ Chakabhai Pravinsinh Vala, Digvijaysinh @ Lalubhai Pravinsinh Vala, Vargheses Fransis Christian and Ashok Kalpnath Mishra under Section 372 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 against acquittal of the accused No. 5 from all charges and other accused persons from Section 307, 325 452, 427, 397, 506(1) read with Section 149 of IPC and Section 25(1)(b)(a) of the Arms Act as well as Section 135(1) of the Bombay Police Act.

4. Criminal Appeal No. 1195 of 2013 is filed by original Accused Indrajitsinh @ Chakabhai Pravinsinh Vala and Digvijaysinh @ Lalubhai Pravinsinh Vala against the order of conviction imposed vide judgment and order dated 30.07.2013 passed by the Ld. Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 2, Ahmedabad city in Sessions case No. 346 of 2005 with Sessions Case No. 368 of 2005.

5. Criminal Appeal No. 1203 of 2013 is filed by original Accused Sanjay @ Harpalsinh @ Sango Vikramsinh Zala under Section 374(2) of the CRPC against the order of conviction imposed vide judgment and order dated 30.07.2013 passed by the Ld. Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 2, Ahmedabad city in Sessions case No. 346 of 2005 with Sessions Case No. 368 of 2005.

6. Criminal Appeal No. 1255 of 2013 is filed by original Accused Ashok Kalpnath Mishra against the order of conviction imposed vide judgment and order dated 30.07.2013 passed by the Ld. Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 2, Ahmedabad city in Sessions case No. 346 of 2005 with Sessions Case No. 368 of 2005.

Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 2, Ahmedabad City vide judgment and order dated 30.07.2013 has convicted Orig. accused No.1 Sanjay @ Harpalsinh @ Vikramsinh Zala, Orig. accused No.2 Indrajitsinh Chakabhai Pravinsinh Vala, Orig. accused No.3 Digvijaysinh @ Lalubhai Pravinsinh Vala, and Orig. accused No.6 Ashok Kalpnath Mishra under Section 148 IPC, sentencing them to rigorous imprisonment for 1 (One) year and fine of Rs.500/- each, in default, 1 (One) month R.I. They were further convicted under Section 326 IPC, sentenced to 2 (Two) years 6 (Six) months R.I. and fine of Rs.1500/- each, in default, 3 (Three) months R.I. They were also convicted under Section 324 IPC, s