Gujarat High Court
Suresh Kodumal Jeswani vs State Of Gujarat on 17 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/159/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST CONVICTION) NO. 159
of 2018
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✔
==========================================================
SURESH KODUMAL JESWANI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
DARSHAN M VARANDANI(7357) 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 : 17/04/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. At the outset Mr. Hardik Soni, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor appearing for the State applicant has placed on record
the report of the Police Inspector, Gandhidham 'A' Divsion Police
Station, wherein it has been stated that apart from Chapter Case
under Section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, given by the
real brother of the present applicant, there is no other antecedents
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/159/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/04/2025
undefined
against the applicant and at present he is 75 years of age. It is also
stated by Mr. Hardik Soni, learned Additional Public Prosecutor that
there are no subsequent offences reported against the applicant.
2. The present revision application is preferred, inter alia,
challenging the legality and validity of the order dated 16.12.2017
passed by the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Gandhidham-
Kachchh (hereinafter referred to as the 'appellate court") in Criminal
Appeal no. 03 of 2007 which inter alia confirmed the order dated
05.03.2007 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate in Criminal Case No. 1813 of 2005, whereby the
revisionist applicant came to be convicted for the offences
punishable under Sections 420, 210, 465, 467, 468 and 477(A) of the
Indian Penal Code.
3. The brief facts leading to filing of the present application is
that an offence came to be registered against the present revisionist-
applicant on 17.4.1987 by way of an First Information Report being I-
C.R. No.77 of 1987 for the offence punishable under Section 409,
420, 465, 467, 468 and 477 (A) of the Indian Penal Code. The
allegation against the present applicant is that he has
misappropriated the amount of Rs.3996.21 paise of the Bank by
changing the Account Number of Bank in the Pay-in-slip and
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/159/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/04/2025
undefined
thereafter credited the said amount in his own Account. Pursuant to
the investigation charge-sheet came to be filed and Criminal Case
No. 1813 of 2005 came to be registered.
4. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order of conviction
passed by the learned trial Court, the present applicant preferred
appeal under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before
the learned appellate court, being Criminal Appeal No. 3 of 2007.
The learned appellate court vide order dated 16.12.2017 was pleased
to upheld the order of conviction and dismissed the appeal preferred
by the present applicant, which is assailed in the present application.
5. At the outset, Mr. Darshan Varandani, learned advocate for the
applicant states at the bar that without going into the merits and in
view of the statement made by Mr. Hardik Soni, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor, it may be in the fitness of things to grant benefit
of probation to the applicant. He further submitted that the report of
the Police Inspector, Gandhidham 'A' Division states that there is no
antecedent against the applicant and even if there is no report of the
probation officer. Looking to the facts of the case and looking to the
fact that the incident is 30 years old and at present the applicant is
75 years of age, there is no antecedent except Chapter case, the
amount involved is around 3,000/- and there is no dispute that the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/159/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/04/2025
undefined
amount was credited even before the trial commenced to the Regular
Account of the Account holder, and therefore, benefit of probation
under Section 360 of the Code of Criminal Procedure could be
granted to the applicant.
6. It is true that the revisional jurisdiction under Section 397 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure has limited jurisdiction which can be
exercisable if the court below has committed a manifest illegality or
the findings are perverse and based on misreading of evidence
resulting into miscarriage of justice. Therefore, there cannot be any
infirmity with the impugned judgment and order. However, Section
360 of the Code of Criminal Procedure deals with releasing an
offender on probation of good conduct, with regard to his age,
character as well as the incident and antecedents, then the
underlying object for releasing the offender after conviction is to be
dealt with leniently in respect of his sentence, is in tune with the
reformative theory of punishment. It is also stated by learned
Additional Public Prosecutor on the basis of instructions received
that there are no antecedents of the applicant.
7. Section Procedure probation 360 deals of the Code Criminal
offender deals with releasing an offender on probation of good
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/159/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/04/2025
undefined
conduct or after admonition the Section says that when any person
not under 21 yeas 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
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
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/159/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/04/2025
undefined
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.
8. In view of the above, looking to the nature of offence 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 directed by the Court.
9. With the aforesaid directions and providence as above, the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.RA/159/2018 JUDGMENT DATED: 17/04/2025
undefined
present Criminal Revision Application succeeds and same is made
allowed to the aforementioned extent. Rule is made absolute
accordingly.
(PRANAV TRIVEDI,J)
SAJ GEORGE
