CR.A/18919/1992 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 189 of 1992 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA ====================================== 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ====================================== BAROT JASWANTBHAI BHIKABHAI & OTHERS Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ====================================== Appearance : Mr Magan Barot with Mr Y.V.Brahmbhatt for the Appellants PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Opponent(s) : 1, ====================================== CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA CR.A/18919/1992 2/3 JUDGMENT Date : 21/10/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD) The present appeal has been filed by the appellants – original accused challenging the judgment and order dated 24th February 1992 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Himatnagar in Sessions Case No.59 of 1991. Heard learned counsel for the parties. It is submitted at bar that the husband has served out his sentence as passed by the trial Court. The father has lived his life. Now remains the mother – Maniben, appellant No.3 herein, who has been convicted under Section 498A of IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for one year. She has remained for some period in custody and thereafter she was granted bail. Learned counsel for the appellant urges that in the facts and circumstances of the case he would not dispute occurrence of the incident and submits that it is a case where Section 498A of IPC has been invoked. The learned counsel for the appellant has not challenged the findings of the trial Court on his convicting under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. Here we take note of the fact that at the present distance of time the conviction under Section 498A of IPC, it would not be appropriate to send a mother-in-law to serve out a small sentence. Consequently, we affirm the findings of the trial Court and reduce the sentences to such period which has already been undergone by appellant No.3. CR.A/18919/1992 3/3 JUDGMENT Consequently, the appeal is allowed. Bail bonds are cancelled. (Bhagwati Prasad, J.) (Bankim N Mehta, J.) *mohd