IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 767 of 2005 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI Sd/-

================================================================

Approved for Reporting Yes No 

================================================================

STATE OF GUJARAT Versus PATEL AMBALAL DWARKADAS & ANR.

================================================================

Appearance:

MR HARDIK MEHTA, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Appellant(s) No. 1 BAILABLE WARRANT UNSERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2 DELETED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1 MR MB PARIKH(576) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2 ================================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI Date : 12/12/2025

ORAL JUDGMENT

1. The appellant-State has filed the present Appeal under Section 377 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to in short as ‘Cr.P.C.’) making a prayer for enhancement of the sentence awarded by the learned Special Sessions Judge, Mehsana in Special Atrocity Case No.64 of 2004 on 19.02.2005. The learned Special Judge, Mehsana had convicted accused Nos.1 and 2 while accused Nos.3, 4 and 5 were acquitted. The conviction qua the accused Nos.1 and 2 was under Sections 323 and 325 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) where both the accused were ordered to serve the sentence till the rising of the Court. In addition, under both the Sections, each of the accused were ordered to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, were ordered to undergo 7 days imprisonment.

1.1. The learned Judge had also ordered to pay 50% of the fine amount to the injured – Bhikhabhai Shankarbhai Senma and Jetabhai Nathabhai. The compensation amount as recorded was Rs.5,000/- to each of the injured.

2. During the pendency of the appeal, the accused No.1-

Patel Ambalal Dwarkadas died and hence, his name came to be deleted as abated from the proceedings. The case, thus would be concentrated considering the sentence ordered by the learned Judge qua the accused-appellant No.2.

3. It is required to be recorded that the proceedings against all the five accused were under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 325, 504, 506(2) and 403 of the IPC and under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to in short as ‘the Atrocity Act’). No conviction was ordered under the Atrocity Act.

4. The endorsement of the Nazir on the very same day, i.e.

19.02.2025 shows that both the accused had deposited a total amount of Rs.20,000/- before the Court.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Hardik Mehta referring to the sequence of the incident which was presented before the trial Court submitted that the sentence awarded for the offences under Section 323 and 325 of the IPC till the rising of the Court and fine of Rs.5,000/- is highly inadequate and disproportionate to the offences committed by the accused. Learned APP Mr. Mehta submitted that the learned trial Court Judge was too lenient while imposing the sentence and the same deserves to be enhanced in view of the seriousness of the offences committed. It is further submitted that the learned trial Court Judge has failed to appreciate the fact that the accused in abetment had committed the offences under conspiracy with a clear intention to fulfill their motives and thereby, had assaulted the complainant and prosecution witness, and had caused severe injuries with deadly weapons like stick, ‘aado’ and wooden log. Learned APP submitted that the learned trial Court Judge has erred in imposing lesser sentence inspite of believing the offence under Sections 323 and 325 of the IPC. It is also submitted that the above punishment is mockery of justice and such leniency in sentence would encourage people to commit further offences where there would not be any deterring effect of the sentence or the fear of law.

6. Countering the above arguments