The Gujarat High Court has sharply criticised the State police and the Public Prosecutor’s (PP) office for failing to inform it that the sole accused in a murder case under appeal had died nearly nine years ago [State of Gujarat v. Raijibhai Fulabhai Sodha].
The lapse led the Court to convict the deceased, Raijibhai Sodhane, on July 11, 2025, for murdering his wife. The conviction was passed without knowledge that Sodhane had died on September 21, 2016.
Following the conviction, the Court had sought Sodhane’s presence to hear his submissions on sentencing. Since he had been absent during the final hearings, a non-bailable warrant was issued for his production.
However, at the hearing on July 28, the State’s counsel produced a police report and death certificate confirming Sodhane’s death in 2016.
A Division Bench of Justices Cheekati M Roy and DM Vyas took strong exception to the lapse:
"Both the concerned police and the office of the PP made the Court hear a matter where the accused had passed away long back. Since he was the sole accused, the appeal stood abated at the time of his death in 2016. Yet for nine years, neither the police nor the PP’s office brought this fact to the Court’s notice. It is the negligence of the police that led to the Court delivering a judgment in a case where the accused was no longer alive," the Bench observed.
The State’s counsel submitted that the omission occurred because the police had failed to communicate the death to the PP’s office. The Court, however, condemned the lack of coordination:
"We very seriously deprecate the negligence of the concerned police in not informing the fact of death to the PP’s office or to the Additional Public Prosecutor even when the matter came up for final hearing," it said.
The Court directed the Superintendent of Police, Kheda district, to take appropriate action against the responsible officers. It also instructed the PP’s office to implement stricter verification and coordination mechanisms in old appeals to prevent similar occurrences.
Referring to the Supreme Court’s ruling in S v. Sunil Kumar and Anr, the Bench clarified that the July 11 conviction order had no legal effect since it was passed without knowledge of the accused’s death.
Accordingly, the July 11 judgment was recalled, and the State’s appeal was closed as abated.
Picture Source :
