THAKORE BHANIYO @ PRAHLADJI ISHWARJI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned advocate Mr. Mrudul Barot for the appellant and learned APP Mr. K. L. Pandya for the respondent State. Perused the record.

(2.) Learned APP has submitted a jail report dated 20.06.2015 confirming that appellant has been released from jail, since he has undergone the sentence awarded, after getting benefit of remission. Therefore, practically unless appellant wants to proceed further in the appeal for any specific purpose, the appeal becomes infructous. However, since appellant has not come forward and since matter is assigned in legal aid, it would be appropriate to consider the merits of the appeal and, therefore, learned advocate Mr. Barot has argued at length to see that whether appellant can get any benefit of doubt and thereby acquittal, which would now only academic and only on paper.

(3.) In view of such fact, it would not be necessary to enter into minute scrutiny of entire evidence on record, except to find out clinching evidence only to see that whether impugned judgment needs any interference or not. For the purpose, I have perused the impugned judgment. Prima facie, I do not find any irregularity, illegality, perverseness, arbitrariness or shortcoming in such reasoned judgment, whereby appellant has been convicted and awarded 10 years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.30,000/- and in default of payment of fine, further rigorous imprisonment of 2 years under Section 376 of the IPC and 3 years rigorous imprisonment with Rs.5000/- fine and in defult of payment of fine he has to undergo rigorous imprisonment for further 6 months under Section 506(II) of the IPC. The jail record shows that appellant has not deposited the amount of fine and therefore he has undergone full sentence of 12 years and 6 months, since sentence is to run concurrently.