RAMESHBHAI DHIRUBHAI SHIYAL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) As both these Appeals arise out of the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Bhavnagar (hereinafter referred to as the "the learned trial Court") in Sessions Case No. 21/2012 one Appeal is preferred by the original accused challenging his conviction for the offence punishable under Sec. 326 of the Indian Penal Code, being Criminal Appeal No. 663/2013 and another Appeal is preferred by the State to enhance the sentence imposed by the learned trial Court, imposed while convicting the original accused for the offence punishable under Sec. 326 of the Indian Penal Code, both these Appeal are heard, decided and disposed of by this common judgment and order. At the outset, it is required to be noted that the original accused was charged for the offence punishable under Sec. 307 of the Indian Penal Code and for the offence punishable under Sec. 135 of the Bombay Police Act and at the conclusion of the trial by the impugned judgment and order the learned trial Court has held the original accused guilty for the offence punishable under Sec. 326 of the Indian Penal Code and has sentenced him to undergo three years Rigorous Imprisonment with fine of Rs. 1000/ - and in default to undergo further one month Rigorous Imprisonment and also imposed fine of Rs. 200/ - and in default to undergo one day imprisonment for the offence punishable under Sec. 135 of the Bombay Police Act.

(2.) 1 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order of conviction, original accused has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 663/2013 and being dissatisfied with the sentence imposed by the learned trial Court imposed while convicting the original accused for the offence punishable under Sec. 326 of the Indian Penal Code and Sec. 135 of the Bombay Police Act, State has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 1055/2013 for enhancement of the sentence.

(3.) At this stage it is required to be noted that the original accused was charged for the offence under Sec. 307 of the Indian Penal Code and by the impugned judgment and order the learned trial Court has held the original accused guilty for the offence punishable under Sec. 326 of the Indian Penal Code and thereby convicted the original accused for the offence punishable under Sec. 326 of the Indian Penal Code, and therefore, State preferred Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 12016/2013 in Criminal Appeal No. 1057/2013 with Criminal Appeal No. 1057/2013 challenging the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned trial Court in so far as acquitting the original accused for the offence punishable under Sec. 307 of the Indian Penal Code and the Division Bench vide order dated 01/10/2013 has dismissed the said application for leave to Appeal and consequently the Appeal. It appears that at the time when the Division Bench considered the aforesaid application for leave to Appeal and the Appeal against acquittal the attention of the Division Bench with respect to pendency of the present Appeals was not drawn. Be that as it may. The order passed by the Division Bench dismissing the aforesaid application for Leave to Appeal and Criminal Appeal confirming the acquittal for the offence punishable under Sec. 307 of the Indian Penal Code has attained finality. Under the circumstances, now this Court is required to consider the present two Criminal Appeals, one preferred by the original accused challenging the conviction for the offence punishable under Sec. 326 of the Indian Penal Code and another preferred by the State for enhancement of the sentence imposed by the learned trial Court, imposed while convicting the original accused for the offence punishable under Sec. 326 of the Indian Penal Code.