LAWS(GJH)-2009-2-8

SHAILESHKUMAR BACHUBHAI DATT Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

Decided On February 06, 2009
SHAILESHKUMAR BACHUBHAI DATT(DEVI PUJAK) Appellant
V/S
STATE OF GUJARAT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE. Learned A. P. P. waives service. The petitioner has invoked Section 397 of Cr. P. C. for calling into question the order dated 23. 09. 2008 in Criminal Case No. 11220 of 2006, by which he is convicted of offence under Section 142 of the Bombay Police Act, and sentenced to six months' imprisonment and fine of Rs. 200/ -. The petitioner having preferred an appeal therefrom, the appeal is dismissed on 23. 01. 2009 by an elaborate order and after considering the arguments which were reiterated before this Court. It was further submitted by learned counsel, Mr. Qureshi, that it was the first offence of the petitioner and he was having liability of maintaining his family and hence, the Court was required to take a lenient view so as to at least reduce the term of sentence. Apparently, the petitioner had violated the order of his externment and was found by the police to be committing another offence by carrying illicit liquor in the area in which he was prohibited from entering. Therefore, the behaviour and attitude of the petitioner cannot be viewed lightly and there is no reason to set aside the conviction.

(2.) AS for the term of imprisonment, it was seen that as against the maximum punishment of imprisonment for two years, the courts below have sentenced the petitioner only to six months of imprisonment. It was submitted by learned counsel, on behalf of the petitioner, that the petitioner would file an undertaking to the effect that he will not indulge in any illegal activity after being released from prison and will surrender to jail latest by 16. 02. 2009. Having regard to the age and other circumstances of the petitioner and the statement made on his behalf that he will not indulge in any illegal activities while pursuing his legal job of driving vehicles, the sentence is reduced to imprisonment for three months while the amount of fine is already stated to have been paid.

(3.) RULE is made absolute accordingly with no order as to costs. Direct service.