Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Raijibhai Fulabhai Sodha on 28 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1248/2013 ORDER DATED: 28/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (AGAINST ACQUITTAL) NO. 1248 of 2013
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
RAIJIBHAI FULABHAI SODHA
==========================================================
Appearance:
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Appellant(s) No. 1
NON BAILABLE WARRANT NOT RECEIVED BACK for the
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 : 28/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHEEKATI
MANAVENDRANATH ROY)
As per the judgment dated 11.07.2025, the appeal
preferred by the Sstate was allowed and the sole accused
was found guilty and was convicted for the said offences. As
the accused was absent on that day, this Court has issued
non-bailable warrant against him to secure his presence for
the purpose of questioning him on the quantum of sentence.
The following order was passed on that day:
"As the accused is not available before the Court, to
question him on the quantum of sentence, issue Non-bailable
warrant against the accused to secure his presence for the
purpose of questioning him on the quantum of sentence and
to impose sentence against him, returnable on 28th July
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1248/2013 ORDER DATED: 28/07/2025
undefined
2025."
Today when the matter is taken up, to our utter
surprise, learned APP Ms. Krina Calla submits on
instructions that in fact the accused died long back on
21.09.2016 itself and she has also produced a copy of death
certificate to that effect along with report of the Police
Inspector, Mahemdabad Police Station. She submits that
the factum of his death is not informed earlier to the office
of PP or atleast to her when the matter was heard by this
Court and for want of information from the police regarding
his death, that she could not bring it to the notice of the
Court. We very seriously deprecate the said negligence on
the part of the concerned police in not informing the factum
of death of the accused to the office of the PP of the High
Court and also to present APP even when the matter is
taken up for final hearing.
Therefore, both the concerned police and office of PP
made the Court hear the matter in a case where accused
passed away long back. When he died on 21.09.2016 itself
in an appeal preferred in the year 2013, since he is the sole
accused in the case, the appeal stood abated against him at
the time of death itself. But for a period of 9 years, both the
police and the office of PP did not bring the said factum of
death of the accused to the notice of Court. It is the
negligence of the police which made the Court to pass a
judgment in a case where accused passed away. It is a fit
case where appropriate action is to be taken against the
concerned police for their negligence in discharging their
duties in not informing the office of PP and also to the Court
regarding the factum of death of the sole accused in the
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1248/2013 ORDER DATED: 28/07/2025
undefined
case to enable the Court to pass appropriate order of
abatement of the appeal against the accused. Therefore,
both the learned PP and APP are hereby directed to take the
act of negligence on the part of the concerned Police to the
notice of Superintendent of Police, Kheda District to take
appropriate action against the concerned police officials who
are very negligent in discharging their duties in not bringing
to the notice of office of PP and also to the notice of the
Court regarding the death of the Accused. The office of PP
shall take steps to see that such incidents do not recur in
future causing much inconvenience to the Court and
wasting the time of the Court and in making the Court to
pass judgment in a case where the appeal stood abated. The
office of PP also equally got responsibilities to verify in such
old appeals regarding the availability or not of the accused
before commencing argument in final hearing matter of
such cases. It shows that there is lack of proper co-
ordination between police and the office of the PP.
Therefore, no sentence could be passed in the present
matter as the accused passed away on 21.09.2016, as the
appeal against him stands abated as per law.
Now, the question that arises for consideration is what
would be the effect of the judgment dated 11.07.2025 that
was passed after final hearing of the appeal. The legal
position in this regard is not res integra and the Hon'ble
Apex Court had an occasion to deal with the similar
situation. The Supreme Court in the case of S vs.
Sunilkumar and Another (2016) 16 Supreme Court 687
held "when the factum of death of the accused was not
brought to the notice of the Court when the appeal was
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1248/2013 ORDER DATED: 28/07/2025
undefined
heard and decided convicting the accused, the said
judgment will have no effect and it has to be recalled
recording the fact that the accused had expired before the
appeal was heard out and the appeal had became abated."
Therefore, in view of the dictum laid down by the Apex
Court in the above reported judgment, the judgment dated
11.07.2025 allowing the appeal of the State and convicting
the accused will have no effect and the said judgment is
hereby recalled and the appeal is disposed of as abated.
(CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY, J)
(D. M. VYAS, J)
Anuj
