Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Varsingbhai Puniyabhai Bariya on 11 August, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1366/2013 ORDER DATED: 11/08/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (AGAINST ACQUITTAL) NO. 1366 of 2013
================================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
VARSINGBHAI PUNIYABHAI BARIYA
================================================================
Appearance:
MR BHARGAV PANDYA, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
NON BAILABLE WARRANT SERVED for Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHEEKATI
MANAVENDRANATH ROY
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D. M. VYAS
Date : 11/08/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY)
1. As the accused was not present on the date of judgment,
non-bailable warrant was issued against him to secure his
presence to question him on the quantum of sentence to be
imposed on him. Pursuant to the non-bailable warrant that was
issued against him, he was brought under arrest by the police
on execution of the said non-bailable warrant and he is
produced before the Court today. The accused was found
guilty for the offence punishable under Section 354 of IPC and
he was convicted for the said offence.
2. The offence took place in the year 2007. On the date of
offence, the punishment prescribed for the offence of assault
or criminal force used against a woman with an intent to
outrage her modesty is imprisonment of either description for
a term, which may extend to two years or with fine or with
both.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1366/2013 ORDER DATED: 11/08/2025
undefined
3. When we have questioned the accused regarding the
quantum of punishment to be imposed on him, he stated that
he is now aged about 50 years and that he is a married person
and he got a wife and five children, who are all dependents on
him and that he is living by doing cultivation and he got only
two acres of land and he is the sole bread-winner of his family.
Therefore, he requests to take into consideration his economic
and family condition and take lenient view and impose lesser
sentence on him.
4. Mr.Minhaj M.Shaikh, learned advocate submits that he
got instructions from the accused to represent on his behalf
and he seeks permission to file Vakalatnama. Permission is
accorded. Registry is directed to accept the Vakalatnama,
which is to be filed by him today, as assured by him. We have
heard learned counsel Mr.Minhaj Shaikh on the quantum of
sentence to be imposed on the accused. He submits that as
the accused is a poor man and only agriculture is his source of
livelihood and he got a wife and five children, who are
dependents on him, he requests to take a lenient view and
impose only fine on him instead of punishing him with
imprisonment.
5. We have also heard Mr.Bhargav Pandya, learned APP for
the State. He submits that it is a case of outraging the modesty
of a minor girl, which is a serious offence and he requests the
Court not to take a lenient view and to impose maximum
period of imprisonment against the accused.
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1366/2013 ORDER DATED: 11/08/2025
undefined
6. We have taken into consideration the submissions made
by the accused, his counsel and learned APP for the State and
his family condition and economic condition.
7. As per the facts of the case, it is a case of outraging the
modesty of a minor girl. Therefore, having regard to the
seriousness and gravity of the offence, even though the
accused got a family, who are dependents on him, we are not
inclined to impose only fine on him as it would not be
commensurate with the seriousness of the offence committed
by him. Therefore, the accused is sentenced to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a
fine of Rs.1,000/- and, in default of payment of fine, to undergo
simple imprisonment for a period of one month for the offence
punishable under Section 354 of IPC.
8. The period of imprisonment, if any undergone by him
during pre-trial stage and during trial stage, shall be given set
off to him under Section 428 of Criminal Procedure Code.
(CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY, J)
(D. M. VYAS, J)
R.S. MALEK
