VIJAYBHAN DULESING GAHARWAL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant-accused-Vijaybhan Dhulesingh Gaharwal has filed this appeal through jail challenging his order of conviction and sentence dated 12.3.2003 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Navsari in Sessions Case No.48/99 whereby he has convicted the appellant-accused for serious offences like Section 364-A, 302, 507 and 201 of the IPC and sentenced him to suffer life imprisonment for the offence u/S.302 of the IPC and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/= in default to further undergo RI for 4 months. He has also sentenced to suffer life imprisonment and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/= in default to further undergo RI for 4 months for the offence u/S.364-A of the IPC. He has also sentenced him to suffer RI for 2 years and to pay fine of Rs.500/= in default to further undergo RI for 2 months for the offence u/S.201 of the IPC. All the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The appellant accused has applied for free legal aid in this case as according to him he could not engage private advocate because of his financial condition. Therefore, the office has appointed learned advocate, Mr.Pankaj Soni to defend his case in this appeal. R & P of this case had already been received from the Trial Court.

(2.) Learned counsel Mr.Soni for the appellant-accused vehemently argued this appeal and submitted that he has a prima facie case for admission of the appeal, therefore, this appeal be admitted by refusing prayer made for bail by the appellant-accused. He also submitted that when the appellant-accused has been convicted for the major offence u/S.302 of the IPC for committing murder and for the offence u/S.364-A of the IPC for kidnapping for ransom and sentenced to suffer life imprisonment, then at least one chance be given to the appellant-accused by admitting this appeal so that he can argue appeal fully at the time of final hearing. It is no doubt true that the appellant-accused has been convicted for the serious offence like murder u/S.302 of the IPC and kidnapping for ransom for offence u/S.364-A of the IPC and sentenced to suffer life imprisonment. But in our considered opinion, it is always not necessary for this court to straightaway admit the appeal when this court is fully convinced that the accused has no case for even admission of the appeal. We were conscious of the fact that the appellant-accused is convicted for the offence u/Ss.302 and 364-A of the IPC and sentenced him to suffer life imprisonment. Therefore, we have heard learned counsel Mr.Soni at the admission stage fully as R & P of the case was very much with us. Learned counsel Mr.Soni for the appellant-accused had taken us through the reasons assigned by the learned Judge for convicting and sentencing him for the aforesaid offences and also the relevant evidence of the prosecution witnesses.

(3.) Having carefully gone through the same, we are of the considered opinion that while convicting the appellant-accused for the aforesaid offence, the learned Judge had not committed any error whatsoever, which calls for the interference of this court in this appeal, therefore, the appeal is required to be dismissed in limine.