Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 219 (GUJ)

Sukdev Ilyashbhai Vasava v. State of Gujarat

2018-01-23

SONIA GOKANI

body2018
JUDGMENT : 1. This appeal arises from the judgment and order dated 31.10.2012 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bharuch, whereby the Court has convicted under section 304(2) of the Indian Penal Code the appellant to undergo sentence of 07 (seven) years of rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.20,000/in default to undergo further period of sentence of simple imprisonment of 01(one) year. He has to further further three months of sentence of rigorous imprisonment under section 279 of the Indian Penal Code with fine of Rs.1000/in default to undergo one month of simple imprisonment. For the offence under section 337 of the Indian Penal Code, he has been awarded rigorous imprisonment of 03(three) months and fine of Rs. 500/, in default to undergo 15 (fifteen) days of simple imprisonment. All the sentences run concurrently. 2. This appeal has been admitted on 5.3.2013 and was pending for final hearing. Unfortunately, the same could not be heard and for all the seven years the appellant has been in Jail. It is on his completion of 7 years of period of sentence that the appellant has chosen to deposit the amount of fine, which otherwise would entitle the authority to continue him in jail for the further period of 01 (one) year of simple imprisonment. 3. Mr. Hardik Shah, learned advocate appearing for the appellant has urged that his father Ilyashbhai Shitla Vasava is present. According to whom, he has been instrumental in looking after the children of the present appellant and he has no means except one acre of agricultural land. He has urged that having paid the remaining amount of fine, the applicant appellant should be released. It is further his say that he is in a poor financial condition to offer any compensation, even otherwise imposed by the Court. Learned advocate for the appellant, on instructions from the father of the appellant, has submitted that the appellant is not desirous of continuing the appeal. 4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1-State does not dispute that the factum of his having completed 7 years in jail, which was the maximum punishment imposed by the trial Court. He further confirmed that the State has not filed any appeal against such judgment and order of conviction. 4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1-State does not dispute that the factum of his having completed 7 years in jail, which was the maximum punishment imposed by the trial Court. He further confirmed that the State has not filed any appeal against such judgment and order of conviction. He further urged this Court that with completion of seven years and payment of fine, nothing remains in the matter unless the appellant is desirous of proceeding on merit. 5. Having, thus heard learned advocates for both the sides and also on noticing the confirmation given by the jail authority, that he has already spent 7 years of imprisonment, coupled with the fact that he has paid fine of Rs.21,500/, with clear instructions received by the learned advocate Mr. Shah of not to proceed with the matter, this appeal is being disposed of as dismissed for the applicant having undergone the period of sentence imposed by the trial Court and not desirous of pursuing the same. The amount of fine has been deposited by the appellant. 6. As a parting note, it needs to be recorded that the appellant and his family has very meager means. Therefore, additionally, no direction is being issued for grant of compensation for the heirs of those who have been the victim of the crime, however, while giving them the token amount of Rs.1500/-they are also to be considered under the Victims’ Compensation Scheme by the authority concerned and grant them compensation in accordance with the said scheme. 7. It is noted that the Victims’ Compensation Scheme has been contemplated under section 357A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which has been inserted into the statute book with effect from 31.12.2009, it is a different thing that the State has come out with the said scheme belatedly. The Chairman Legal Services Authorities, Bharuch on its own motion or on any application made by the heirs of the victim, shall decide the same within three months. 8. The appellant, with immediate effect, today shall be released, if not required in any matter. 9. Registry shall communicate this order by fax today itself and the Central Jail, Vadodara shall ensure that the execution of the directions in the order of this Court without further loss of time.