GUJARAT MARITIME BOARD Vs. RAMESHGAR KALYANGAR GOSAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present respondent No.1 is convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 186 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) by the judgment and order 3.3.1999 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mandvi-Kutch in Criminal Case No. 891 of 1998 and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment of three months with fine of Rs.250/-, in default, to further undergo simple imprisonment of one month for the offence punishable under Section 186 and also sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment of one year for the offence punishable under Section 504 of IPC. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The respondent-accused was acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 294(B).

(2.) The aforesaid judgment and order was challenged by the petitioner-accused before the Court of learned Addl.Sessions Court, Bhuj-Kutch by way of filing Criminal Appeal No. 4 of 1999. The learned Addl.Sessions Judge, Bhuj-Kutch vide his judgment and order dated 18.5.1999 allowed the said appeal and acquitted the accused mainly on the ground that the complaint was not lodged before the Court which has jurisdiction to try the case, without obtaining permission from the competent authority. The learned Addl.Sessions Judge has, in no unequivocal terms, also observed that the learned Magistrate ought not to have entertained the complaint as per the provisions of Section 195 of Cr.PC. for the offences punishable under Sections 504 and 186 of IPC and therefore, the said judgment and order of the learned Magistrate has been reversed. The said judgment and order is under challenge in this appeal.

(3.) It is submitted by learned advocate Ms.Mandavia for the petitioner, learned APP Mr.Pujari for respondent-State and learned advocate Mr.Akant Ahuja for respondent-accused that the respondent-accused has given written apology by submitting a purshis. It is also submitted by learned advocate Ms. Mandavia that as far as Vinodkumar Babulal - orig. complainant is concerned, he has already passed away, but as far as the other staff members are concerned, they have no grievance as respondent accused has given written apology. In view of the above, the learned advocates for the parties, therefore, submitted that the Court may pass appropriate orders.