Gujarat High Court
Dasarathbhai Meghjibhai Chaudhary vs State Of Gujarat on 15 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/977/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST CONVICTION) NO. 977
of 2017
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI
==================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes
No
✔
==================================================
DASARATHBHAI MEGHJIBHAI CHAUDHARY
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==================================================
Appearance:
MR N P CHAUDHARY(3980) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR TUSHAR CHAUDHARY(5316) 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 : 15/04/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. The present revision application under Section 397 read with
Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is preferred assailing
the correctness and validity of the judgment and order dated
25.09.2017 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Navsari in
Criminal Appeal No. 12 of 2010 (hereinafter referred to as the
"appellate court") which inter alia dismissed the Criminal Appeal
preferred by the applicant and confirmed the judgment and order
dated 29.06.2010 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/977/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/04/2025
undefined
Class, Chikhli in Criminal Case No. 564 of 2005.
2. The brief facts leading to filing of the present application is
that on 30.01.2005, the revisionist applicant being driver of the S.T.
Bus bearing registration no. GJ-18-V-5855 was driving the bus in a
very rash and negligent manner and while overtaking, the bus fell
down, which resulted into injuries being caused to the passengers.
This incident led to registration of First Information Report being
C.R. No. I-51 of 2005 with Chikhli Police Station, District Navsari for
the offenes punishable under Sections 279 and 337 of the Indian
Penal Code read with Sections 177 and 184 of the Motor Vehicles
Act. On completion of investigation, charge sheet came to be filed
before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chikhli which
culminated into registration of Criminal Case No. 564 of 2005. After
hearing the learned advocate for the parties and having perusing the
material on record, the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class,
Chikhli vide judgment and order dated 29.06.2010 was pleased to
convict the applicant for the offences punishable under Sections 279
and 337 of the Indian Penal Code and sentence him to undergo
simple imprisonment for a period of three months and fine of
Rs.500/- and in default, to further undergo simple imprisonment of
five days. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/977/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/04/2025
undefined
order of conviction dated 29.06.2010 passed by the learned Judicial
Magistrate First Class, Chikhli, the present applicant under Section
374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure preferred appeal being
Criminal Appeal No. 12 of 2010 before the learned appellate court.
The learned appellate court by way of judgment and order dated
25.09.2017 was pleased to dismiss the appeal and confirmed the
order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, which
has resulted into filing of the present revision application.
3. Heard Mr. N. P. Chaudhary, learned advocate for the applicant
and Hardik Soni, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for
the State - respondent.
4. At the outset, Mr. Chaudhary, learned advocate for the
applicant has stated that instead of going into the merits of the
matter, it would be in the fitness of things to grant the benefit of
Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act to the applicant.
5. Heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties and
perused the material on record. It has been submitted by Mr.
Chaudhary that it is not in dispute that the present applicant does
not have any further antecedents and therefore, the Court may grant
the benefit of probation to the present applicant. However, Mr.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/977/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/04/2025
undefined
Hardik Soni, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has also placed on
record the report of the Police Inspector, Chikhli Police Station,
District Navsari 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
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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/977/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/04/2025
undefined
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.
5. In view of the above, 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 one
year. The applicant shall further furnish surety of equivalent amount
in addition to the personal bond as above. The applicant shall remain
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/977/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/04/2025
undefined
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 directed by the Court.
6. With the aforesaid directions and providence as above, the
present Criminal Revision Application partly succeeds and same is
made allowed to the aforementioned extent. Rule is made absolute
accordingly.
(PRANAV TRIVEDI,J)
phalguni
