BHANUBHAI KHANABHAI ROHIT Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SINCE the petitioner had filed, through jail, an application for bail on grounds of extremely poor financial condition and sickness of his aged parents, the present appeal was ordered to be listed for hearing and he was directed to be brought to the Court from jail. Even as learned counsel, Mr. N. N. Prajapati, was stated to be appearing by way of Legal Aid, no one was present for the appellant. Therefore, learned counsel, Mr. K. J. Panchal, present in the Court and who kindly consented to assist the Court, was appointed as amicus curiae.

(2.) UPON instruction of the appellant, who was personally present in the court, learned counsel, Mr. Panchal submitted that the appellant proposed to restrict the appeal to challenge the sentence imposed upon the appellant by the impugned judgment and order. It was argued that the appellant is convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 363,366,376,342 and 506 (2) of IPC and sentenced inter alia to rigorous imprisonment for seven years with fines totalling to Rs. 14,000/ -. It was pointed out from the impugned judgment and the evidence, including deposition of the prosecutrix, that she was aged about 17 years 04 months and 18 days at the time of the alleged offence in March 2004, and there was some record of an affair. It was stated, on instructions, that the prosecutrix has been happily married thereafter and the appellant has already undergone nearly 05 years of imprisonment at the age of 29.

(3.) IT was stated from the jail record that the likely date of release of the appellant, on account of his good behaviour, was 07. 11. 2009. However, the appellant was not in a financial condition to pay any amount of fine which may result into further imprisonment for two years. Under the circumstances, it was submitted that the appellant having been more than sufficiently punished already, sentence was required to be modified to reduce the term and delete the part of fine.