Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 8788 Guj
Judgement Date : 19 December, 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/2898/2022 ORDER DATED: 19/12/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (DIRECTION) NO. 2898 of 2022
==========================================================
PRAMODBHAI VINUBHAI PATEL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
THROUGH JAIL for the Applicant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 2
KSHITIJ M AMIN(7572) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MS MAITHILI MEHTA, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA
Date : 19/12/2023
ORAL ORDER
1. The applicant-convict prisoner-Pramod Patel was convicted and sentenced for the offence punishable under Section-138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. He was tried by the concerned Court for the different four offences and was sentenced to suffer 1 year imprisonment in each case. In these background facts, through Jail Authority, he made a representation that, the convictions passed in independent four cases may be directed to run concurrently.
2. Having considered the facts and contentions raised in the jail application dated 28.02.2022 and on perusal of the judgment of conviction passed in different cases, this Court is of considered opinion that, by different persons and on different dates and on different cause of action, four cases of dishonour of cheque were instituted and accordingly trial Court
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/2898/2022 ORDER DATED: 19/12/2023
undefined
had passed an order of conviction and he was sentenced accordingly. Before the Appellate Court, the applicant-accused moved an application that, since last two years he was in jail and sentence of one year in each case may be converted to run concurrently. The Sessions Court concerned did not accepted the application and by reasoned order, the application came to be rejected. On perusal of the impugned order passed by the Sessions Court in Criminal Appeal No.94 of 2021, this Court is of considered view that, this is not a fit case to entertain the jail application as he had issued four cheques to different individuals on different dates and thus, it cannot be said that the cheques were issued in the same transaction and on same cause of action.
3. Thus, for the reasons recorded, no case is made out to exercise extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court. Resultantly, the present application stands dismissed.
(ILESH J. VORA,J) TAUSIF SAIYED
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!