CHUNILAL PUNJABHAI NAGOTA vs STATE OF GUJARAT

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2171 of 2010 With CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2172 of 2010 With CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1503 of 2011 With CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1504 of 2011 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER ================================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ?
5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
================================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT....Appellant(s)
Versus CHUNILAL PUNJABHAI NAGOTA & 4....Opponent(s)/Respondent(s)
================================================================
Appearance In Criminal Appeal No. 2171 of 2010:
MS CM SHAH, ADDL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR JAPAN V DAVE, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1 – 5 Appearance In Criminal Appeal No. 2172 of 2010:
MS CM SHAH, ADDL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR JAPAN V DAVE, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1 – 5 Appearance In Criminal Appeal No. 1503 of 2011:
MR JAPAN V DAVE, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR NIRAV SANGHVI, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s)
Appearance In Criminal Appeal No. 1504 of 2011:
MR JAPAN V DAVE, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR NIRAV SANGHVI, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s)
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER Date : 23/12/2013

Advocates:
['JAPAN V DAVE', 'PUBLIC PROSECUTOR', 'NIRAV C SANGHAVI', 'DEVARSHI C SHAH']

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER)

1. Criminal Appeal No. 2171 of 2010 has been preferred by the State seeking enhancement of the sentence imposed upon original accused nos. 2, 3, 4, 14 and 16 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge & Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Dahod in Sessions Case No. 220 of 2007 vide judgement and order dated 11.05.2010. The original accused nos. 2, 3, 4, 14 and 16 were convicted for the offence punishable under sections 143, 147, 148, 308, 323, 324 and 338 of Indian Penal Code and the original accused no. 16 was also convicted for the offence punishbale under sections 25(1) (b-a) & 27(1) of the Arms Act. The accused were awarded sentence as under:

a) For the offence punishable under sections 143, 147 & 148 of Indian Penal Code simple imprisonment for six months and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default, two months’

simple imprisonment;

b) For the offence punishable under sections 143, 147 & 148 r/w section 308 of Indian Penal Code simple imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default, two months’ simple imprisonment;

c) For the offence punishable under sections 143, 147 & 148 r/w section 323, 324 of Indian Penal Code simple imprisonment for six months and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default, two months’ simple imprisonment;

d) For the offence punishable under sections 143, 147 & 148 r/w section 337 of Indian Penal Code simple imprisonment for six months and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default, two months’ simple imprisonment;

e) So far as accused no. 16 is concerned, for the offence punishable under sections 25(1)(b-a), 27(1)of the Arms Act, simple imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs.

500/-, in default, two months’ simple imprisonment;

1.1 However, the trial court after passing the order of conviction and sentence as aforesaid, granted benefit of Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act and released the accused persons on a personal bail bond of Rs. 5000/- and surety of good behaviour for the said amount. Hence Criminal Appeal No. 2171 of 2010 has been preferred by the State against the said order of probation seeking enhancement of sentence.

1.2 Criminal Appeal No. 2172 of 2010 has been preferred by the appellant – State against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 11.05.2010 passed by Additional Sessions Judge & Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Dahod in Sessions Case No. 220 of 2007 acquitting original accused nos. 2 to 6 and 8 to 16. Original accused nos. 5, 6, 8 to 13 & 15 were acquitted of the offence punishable under sections 143, 147, 148, 307, 323, 324 and 337 of Indian Penal Code and sections 25(1)(b-a) and 27(1) of The Arms Act. Original accused no. 2, 3, 4, 14 & 16 were acquitted of the offence under section 307 of Indian Penal Code.

1.3 Criminal Appeal No. 1503 of 2011 has been preferred by one Chunilal Punjabhai Nagota – accused no. 2 of Sessions Case No. 220 of 2007 against the original accused nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19 & 20 of Sessions Case No. 221 of 2007 challenging the acquittal of the said accused for the offences punishable under sections 143, 147, 148, 337, 427, 333 & 186 of Indian Penal Code vide judgement and order dated 11.05.2010 passed by Additional Sessions Judge & Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Dahod in Sessions Case No. 221 of 2007.

1.4 Criminal Appeal No. 1504 of 2011 has also been preferred by Chunilal Punjabhai Nagota – accused no. 2 of Sessions Case No. 220 of 2007 against the original accused nos. 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 18 & 21 of Sessions Case No. 221 of 2007 seeking enhancement of the sentence imposed upon the said accused by the learned Additional Sessions Judge & Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Dahod in Sessions Case No. 221 of 2007 vide judgement and order dated 11.05.2010. The original accused nos. 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 18 & 21 of Sessions Case No. 221/2007 were convicted for the offence punishable under sections 143, 147, 148, 332 and 337 of Indian Penal Code. The accused were awarded sentence as un

Click Here to Read the rest of this document