LAWS(GJH)-2011-8-221

CHIRAG LALJIBHAI DESAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

Decided On August 29, 2011
CHIRAG LALJIBHAI DESAI Appellant
V/S
STATE OF GUJARAT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Criminal Revision Application has been filed by the applicant-original accused under Section 397 read with Sec.401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking to quash and set aside judgment and order dated 16-9-2005 passed in Criminal Appeal No.6 of 2005 by the learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No.2, Gandhinagar, whereby judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 9-5-2005 passed in Criminal Case No.1791 of 2000 by the learned Judicial Magistrate(First Class), Gandhinagar, were confirmed.

(2.) IN pursuance of a trial being conducted consequent upon filing of charge sheet for having filed complaint with Sector 7 Police Station, Gandhinagar, against the applicant-accused for the offence punishable under Sec.392 of IP Code, the applicant-accused was convicted and sentenced to suffer RI for 18 months with fine of Rs.250/-, in default, to undergo SI for 8 days by the learned Judicial Magistrate (First Class), Gandhinagar vide judgment and order dated 9-5-2005 passed in Criminal Case No.1791 of 2000. The appeal being Criminal Appeal No.6 of 2005 preferred before the Sessions Court against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence was dismissed by the learned Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court No.2, Gandhinagar. These judgments and orders are under challenge in this revision.

(3.) LEARNED APP, Mr.L.R.Pujari, on the other hand, has submitted that the prosecution has proved the case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. It is further submitted that the complainant has identified the accused in the identification parade before the Mamlatdar and case against the applicant-accused has been proved through the evidence of complainant, witnesses, Mamlatdar and other evidences made available during the course of investigation and hence, the accused was rightly convicted in the offence. According to him, no illegality or perversity has been committed by both the courts in arriving at the conclusion. Since the said findings appear to be just, legal and proper, they are not required to be interfered with.