FAZAL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) At the outset, it is required to be noted that the present Appellant has preferred Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 2 of 2023 in the present Appeal for suspension of sentence. While considering the said Application, it had come to the notice of this Court that the Appellant had already undergone sentence of more than 14 years and therefore the present Appeal has been taken up for final hearing.

(2.) The Appellant has preferred the present Appeal under Sec. 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure challenging the judgment and order dtd. 23/11/2013 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad in Sessions Case No. 55 of 2013 whereby the Appellant came to be convicted for offence punishable under Sec. 120B read with Sec. 364A, read with Sec. 511, Sec. 120(B) read with Sec. 511, Sec. 25(1)(A)(B) and Sec. 27 of the Arms Act, and sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment for offence punishable under Sec. 120(B) read with Sec. 364A, read with Sec. 511 of the Indian Penal Code, Rigorous Imprisonment for 5 Years for offence punishable under Sec. 387 read with Sec. 511 of I.P.C. and Rigorous Imprisonment for 3 Years for the offence punishable under Sec. 25(1)(A)(B) of the Arms Act.

(3.) The facts and circumstances giving rise to the filing of the present Appeal are such that one Pradeep Subhashchandra Mehta had lodged an FIR with the police authorities to the effect that between 1/5/2000 to 15/5/2000 he had received phone calls from Dubai asking him to make payment of ransom money. Allegedly, these phone calls were made by the present Appellant. On the basis of the said information, the offences punishable under Ss. 364, 120B, 511, 387, 120B, 511 of the IPC and Ss. 25(1)(A)(B) and Sec. 27 of the Arms Act came to be registered against the present Appellant and other co-accused. After the conclusion of investigation, the investigation agency filed charge sheet against all the accused. Thereafter, since the present Appellant was absconding, the trial qua him was separated. The learned Magistrate had committed the proceedings to the Court of Sessions under Sec. 209 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the other co-accused. The other co-accused were tried by the learned Sessions Court vide Sessions Case No. 77 of 2001 and the maximum punishment imposed upon those co- accused was imprisonment for 10 years for offence punishable under Sec. 364A read with Sec. 120B and 511 of IPC. Thereafter the present Appellant having been apprehended, the proceedings qua him were committed by the learned Magistrate under Sec. 209 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the trial was conducted against him vide Sessions Case No. 55 of 2013. The prosecution had adopted the evidence adduced by it for the other co-accused in the proceedings of Sessions Case No. 77 of 2001 in the trial of Sessions Case No.55 of 2013. Learned Sessions Judge after considering the evidence adduced on record, was pleased to convict the present Appellant for the offence mentioned herein above and imposed punishment upon the Appellant as referred to herein above. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the same, the Appellant has preferred the present Appeal.