Gujarat High Court
Naginbhai Khodabhai Vasava vs State Of Gujarat on 28 January, 2021
Bench: A.J.Desai, A.C. Rao
R/CR.A/951/2020 IA ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUSPENSION OF SENTENCE) NO. 1
of 2020
In R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 951 of 2020
=============================================
NAGINBHAI KHODABHAI VASAVA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
=============================================
Appearance:
MR NEERAJ SONI for the PETITIONER(s) No.
MS KRINA CALLA, ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the RESPONDENT(s) No.
=============================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.J.DESAI
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.C. RAO
Date : 28/01/2021
IA ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.J.DESAI)
1. RULE. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf
of the respondent - State of Gujarat. With the consent of learned
advocates appearing for respective parties, present application is
taken up for final hearing today.
2. By way of present application under Section 389 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant - convict has prayed to
suspend the sentence imposed upon the applicant vide judgment
and order dated 22.03.2018 passed by the learned Special and
Additional Sessions Judge, Bharuch in Special POCSO Case No.17
of 2016, whereby the applicant/convict has been convicted and
sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for the offences punishable
under Sections 376 and 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and
Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act.
R/CR.A/951/2020 IA ORDER
3. Learned advocate Mr. Neeraj Soni, who has been appointed
by the Gujarat High Court Legal Aid Committee on behalf of the
applicant has supplied the paperbook and argued this application.
He would submit that the step grandfather of the prosecutrix has
been wrongly involved in the present offence. He would submit
that the prosecutrix and her father who happened to be step son of
the applicant herein were in interested in property and therefore,
when the applicant herein married with grandmother of the
prosecutrix, it was disliked by all the family members and
therefore, the applicant herein has been wrongly roped in the
present offence. He would submit that there is no medical evidence
in support of the prosecution case. By taking us through the
certificate issued by the Medical Officer, he would submit that there
are no external injuries found on the person of the prosecutrix.
Therefore, he has requested to allow the present application.
4. On the other hand, learned APP has opposed this application
and would submit that the prosecutrix was minor at the time of
incident and has categorically involved her stepgrandfather. She
would submit that the incident has taken place when the
grandmother of the prosecutrix had gone to nearby vicinity.
Therefore, she has requested to dismiss the present application.
5. We have heard learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties at length and perused the record and proceeding
of the case. Prima facie, we are of the opinion that when the
prosecutrix was minor, she has categorically involved her step
grandfather, however wife of the applicant has also supported the
prosecution case and has categorically stated about the incident as
also the involvement of the applicant herein in the offence in
question. Without going into detail, we are of the opinion that the
R/CR.A/951/2020 IA ORDER
present application is merit less.
6. In view of the above discussion, present application is
rejected. Rule is discharged.
(A.J.DESAI, J)
(A. C. RAO, J)
Ajay
