MUKESHKUMAR RATANSINGH THAKORE Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Ld. Advocate Mr. Nasir Saiyed appearing for Mr. SR Yadav for the appellant and Ld. APP Mr. Pujari for the respondent - State.

(2.) THE appellant has been convicted by the judgment and order dated 31/12/2010 in Sessions Case No. 72/2003 by the Ld. Addl. Sessions Judge & Fast Track Court No. 2 of Banaskantha at Deesa for the offence punishable under section 498 -A and under section 306 of the of the Indian Penal Code [IPC] and sentenced to undergo sentence of rigorous imprisonment [RI] of seven years for the offence punishable under section 306 and fine of Rs.500/ -, in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment [SI] for one month and sentenced to undergo RI of two years for the offence punishable under section 498 -A and fine of Rs.500/ -, in default of payment of fine, to suffer SI for one month. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(3.) AT the outset, Ld. Advocate Mr. Saiyed for the appellant has submitted that he has instructions from the appellant that the appellant does not want to challenge the judgment and order so far as his conviction is concerned, considering the fact that out of total conviction of seven years, he has undergone the imprisonment for 5 years and 11 months, since he has been arrested on 26/3/2003 and pursuant to conviction dated 31/12/2010 he has been sent to jail and pending trial, bail was not granted to him. Therefore, the Ld. APP has called for the jail report and produced the same, which is to be taken on record. Pursuant to such jail report dated 11/10/2014, which is annexed with the calculation of total imprisonment undergone and considering remission that may be available to the appellant under the law, if there is no other jail punishment and even if he does not deposit amount of fine, he would be completing his sentence and would be released from jail on or before 7/12/2015. The record confirms that the appellant has not paid the fine and, therefore, jail authority had added imprisonment of one more month for default in payment of fine. Therefore, it is added in the jail report that if appellant deposits the fine as per the impugned judgment, the period of imprisonment may vary, whereby practically the appellant may be released on or before 7/11/2015.