MISTRY JASWANTBHAI MANILAL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Gaurav Dave, learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant being the accused no.1 was acquitted along with the other co-accused by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mehsana by order dtd. 11/1/2019 in Criminal Case no.4392/06. Aggrieved by the order and judgment of acquittal, the State preferred an acquittal appeal before the learned Sessions Court, Mehsana wherein co- accused no.3's acquittal was confirmed in the appeal while the present applicant was found guilty for the offence punishable under Ss. 465, 468, 477A, 471 and 114 of the IPC while benefit of doubt was given for the offence punishable under Ss. 406, 408 , 420 of the IPC. Mr. Dave states that the applicant is before this Court challenging the judgment of conviction stating that the judgment itself is erroneous as the learned Sessions Judge had after the order of conviction sent the matter back to the Trial Court for passing an appropriate order of sentence.

(2.) Mr. Pranav Trivedi, learned APP, referring to the provisions under Sec. 386 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, submits that the powers of the Appellate Court in case of an appeal from an order of acquittal are specified in clause (a) of Sec. 386 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and the learned Sessions Judge while reversing the order of acquittal after having found accused guilty was required to pass sentence on him and thus, had made a prayer to direct the learned Sessions Court to pass appropriate sentence in the order of conviction so passed.

(3.) Countering the same, advocate Mr. Dave submitted that the very said aspect is one of his ground for revision and thus, stated that the applicant is required to be protected till then, as following the conviction, he may be sent to jail as his interim bail and bond shall be assumed to have been canceled.