Gujarat High Court
Bhanabhai Jinabhai Dungariya vs State Of Gujarat on 9 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/640/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST CONVICTION) NO. 640
of 2017
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI
==================================================
Approved for Reporting NoYes
==================================================
BHANABHAI JINABHAI DUNGARIYA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==================================================
Appearance:
HCLS COMMITTEE(4998) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR PV PATADIYA(5924) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR HARDIK SONI ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Respondent(s)
No. 1
==================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI
Date : 09/04/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The present revision application assails the correctness and
validity of the order dated 30.06.2017 passed by the learned 3 rd
Additional Sessions Judge, Visavdar in Criminal Appeal No. 129 of
2013 (hereinafter referred to as the "appellate court") whereby the
learned appellate court was pleased to confirm the order dated
12.12.2013 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class,
Visavdar in Criminal Case No. 480 of 2011.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/640/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/04/2025
undefined
2. The brief facts leading to filing of the present application is
that the complaint came to be filed before the Junagadh Railway
Police Station, Junagadh being C.R. No. 11 of 2011 wherein it was
alleged that the present revisionist applicant had committed offences
punishable under Sections 324, 326, 504 of the Indian Penal Code
and under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act. It is alleged that the
accused has inflicted knife blow on the complainant on vital part of
the body and injured the complainant. Pursuant to the allegations
made against the accused - present applicant, investigation came to
be conducted and charge sheet came to be filed. Pursuant to filing of
the charge sheet, the case was committed before the learned Judicial
Magistrate First Class, Visavadar Court being Criminal Case No. 480
of 2011. After hearing the parties and on perusal of the material on
record, the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Visavadar was
pleased to convict the present applicant for the offences punishable
under Section 324 of Indian Penal Code by imposing rigorous
imprisonment of two year and fine of Rs.1,000/-. Being aggrieved and
dissatisfied with the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate
First Class, Visavadar, the present applicant preferred appeal being
Criminal Appeal No. 129 of 2013 before the learned appellate court.
The learned appellate court by way of judgment and order dated
30.06.2017 was pleased to dismiss the appeal preferred under
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/640/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/04/2025
undefined
Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and confirmed the
order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class. These
orders are assailed in the present application.
3. At the outset, Mr. P.V. Patadiya, learned advocate for the
applicant has submitted that instead of going into the merits of the
matter and looking to the fact that the incident is almost of 15 years
old and as there are no other antecedents against the revisionist
applicant, this Court may grant the benefit of probation to the
present applicant. However, Mr. Hardik Soni, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor has placed on record the report of the Police Sub-
Inspector, Junagadh Police Station, wherein it is stated that there are
no antecedents against the present applicant.
4. Section 360 of the Code of Criminal Procedure deals with
releasing an offender on probation of good conduct or after
admonition the Section says that when any person not under 21
years of age is convicted for an offence punishable with fine only or
with imprisonment for a term of seven years of less or when any
person under 21 years of age or any woman is convicted of an
offence not punishable death or imprisonment for life and no
previous conviction was proved against the offender, the Court may
having regard to the age of the offender, his character and his
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/640/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/04/2025
undefined
antecedents as well as the circumstances in which the offence is
committed, finds it expedient that the offender should be released on
probation of good conduct, the Court may so direct instead of
requiring him at once to suffer the punishment. As per sub-section
(4) of Section 360, these powers can be exercised by the appellate
court or by the High Court while exercising powers of revision.
Similarly in Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, Section 4 thereof
provides that the Court may release certain offenders on probation of
good conduct. According to Section 4(1), when any person is found
guilty of having committed an offence not publishable with death or
imprisonment of life, the Court may release him on probation of good
conduct. Sub-section (2) provides that while granting the benefit, the
Court shall take into account Report, if any, of the Probation Officer
concerned in relation to the case. The underlying object by the
provision for releasing the offender on probation of good conduct
after his conviction and deal with him leniently in respect of the
sentence, is in tune with the reformative theory of punishment. The
object is to provide an opportunity to the offender to reform himself.
The courts have held that while sentencing a person, the sentencing
court must apply its mind and application of Section 360 of the Code
or Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act should be allowed a
fair play. In Savaldas Ghumamal Vs State of Gujarat being
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/640/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/04/2025
undefined
Criminal Appeal No.361 of 1998 decided on 04.04.2011, this Court
granted benefit of probation of good conduct to the appellant of that
case who was convicted and sentenced for the offence under the
Essential Commodities Act, by taking into consideration amongst
other facts the lapse of 13 years in the proceedings. The Court
observed that in each case the Court should not be enthusiastic to
see that each order of punishment should be carried out just for the
sake of deterrence and held that the trial court ought to have given
the offender the benefit of probation.
5. In view of the above, and the duration of offence, it would be in
the fitness of things to grant benefit of probation to the applicant.
Therefore, instead of requiring the applicant to undergo the sentence
of imprisonment at once, he is directed to be released on probation
of good conduct on execution of bond of Rs.5,000/- for good
behaviour for a period of six months. The applicant shall further
furnish surety of equivalent amount in addition to the personal bond
as above. The applicant shall remain in supervision of good conduct
for the said period and the sentence imposed on him as per the order
impugned shall remain suspended during that period. It is further
directed that in the event of any breach, he shall appear and shall be
required to receive the said sentence during such period as may be
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/640/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 09/04/2025
undefined
directed by the Court.
6. Further, the conviction is confined for offences punishable
under Section 324 wherein it is alleged that present revisionist
applicant had injured the victim on vital part of the body. Therefore,
it would be in the fitness of things if the applicant is directed to pay
additional fine. Therefore, it is directed that the applicant shall
deposit an amount of Rs.50,000/- with the concerned Taluka Legal
Services Authority, within a period of one week from the date of
receipt of this order. On depositing the said amount, the concerned
Taluka Services Authority in turn after proper verification shall pay
the said amount to the victim. The copy of this order also shall be
forwarded to the Gujarat State Legal Service Authority and Taluka
Legal Services Authority, Junagadh for proper compliance of the
order.
7. With the aforesaid directions and providence as above, the
present Criminal Revision Application succeeds and same is made
allowed to the aforementioned extent. Rule is made absolute
accordingly.
(PRANAV TRIVEDI,J)
phalguni
