Gujarat High Court
Gajubha Bhikhubha Gohil vs State Of Gujarat on 21 October, 2021
Bench: Umesh A. Trivedi
R/CR.RA/753/2021 ORDER DATED: 21/10/2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 753 of 2021
==========================================================
GAJUBHA BHIKHUBHA GOHIL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR PARAM BUCH, for MR HRIDAY BUCH(2372) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS JIRGA JHAVERI, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH A. TRIVEDI
Date : 21/10/2021
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard Mr. Param Buch, learned Advocate for Mr. Hriday
Buch, learned Advocate for the applicant.
2. He has submitted that this Revision Application is filed
challenging the judgment of conviction and order of sentence
passed by the Appellate Court in Acquittal Appeal preferred
by the State as also the victim/ witness. As learned
Magistrate, who tried the applicant acquitted him of the
charges levelled against, giving benefit of doubt. As such, the
applicant should have filed an appeal against his conviction
recorded for the first time by the Appellate Court in an
Acquittal Appeal. However, drawing the attention of the
Court to sub section (5) of section 401 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') it is
submitted that the High Court while exercising revisional
jurisdiction under section 401 of 'the Code' can treat the
application for revision as a petition of appeal and deal with
R/CR.RA/753/2021 ORDER DATED: 21/10/2021
the same accordingly. Drawing the attention of this Court to
the Trial Court decision, it is submitted that applicant
remained in custody as under-trial prisoner for about 5 years
approximately and at the fag end of the trial, vide order dated
12.11.2014 the applicant came to be released on bail and
ultimately, acquitted by the Trial Court. Therefore, it is
submitted that this Court can reappreciate the evidence on
facts as well as on law, if it is treated to be an appeal against
his conviction recorded by the Appellate Court for the first
time in Acquittal Appeal. Therefore, this Revision Application
requires consideration.
3. Hence, Rule. Ms. Jirga Jhaveri, learned APP waives service of
notice of Rule on behalf of Respondent-State.
4. However, considering the maximum sentence imposed is of
10 years for an offence under section 467 of the Indian Penal
Code, when the applicant has already undergone 5 years of
sentence, as recorded there in para no.3 of the Trial Court
decision, I deem it fit to release the applicant on bail on the
terms and conditions that may be imposed by the Trial Court.
Bail bond shall be executed before the Trial Court.
Direct service is permitted.
(UMESH A. TRIVEDI, J)
MEHUL B. TUVAR
