CR.RA/207/2007 1/7 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION No. 207 of 2007 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MD SHAH ========================================================= 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 ? ========================================================= JAYESH CHANDRAKANT THAKKAR - Applicant(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR BM GUPTA for Applicant(s) : 1, MR LR PUJARI PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent(s) : 1, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MD SHAH Date : 08/02/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1.0 By way of this application, the applicant has prayed to quash and set aside the order dated 18.01.2007 passed by the learned Additional CR.RA/207/2007 2/7 JUDGMENT Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad City in Criminal Appeal No.99 of 2006 as well as the order dated 20.10.2006 passed by the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad City in Criminal Case No.697 of 2004. 2.0 Before proceeding with the matter, Mr. Gupta, learned Advocate for the applicant has submitted that so far as the findings of the Courts below are concerned, he is not challenging the same. He has submitted that he is pressing this application qua quantum of sentences awarded by the trial Court only. 3.0 The brief facts of the case are that an FIR being C.R. No.I of 2004 came to be registered with C.I.D. Crimes & Railway against the applicant, herein, and two other accused persons for the offence punishable under Sections 120(B), 406, 420, of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 3 and 5 of the Prize Chit & Money Circulation Banning Act which was later on CR.RA/207/2007 3/7 JUDGMENT registered as Criminal Case No.697 of 2004 before the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad City. The trial Court convicted the applicant and two other accused persons for the offences punishable under Section 420 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for four years and to pay fine of Rs.4,000/- and in case of default to undergo further imprisonment for a period of thirty days and for the offence punishable under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code simple imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- and in case of default to undergo further imprisonment for a period of fifteen days as well as for the offence punishable under Section 3 of the Prize Chit & Money Circulation Banning Act, 1978 simple imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- and in case of default to undergo further imprisonment for a period of ten days and for the offence punishable under Section 5 of the Prize Chit & Money Circulation Banning Act, 1978 simple CR.RA/207/2007 4/7 JUDGMENT imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- and in case of default to undergo further imprisonment for a period of ten days and for the offence punishable under Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code simple imprisonment for a period of four years and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- and in case of default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of thirty days. 4.0 Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment and order, the applicant preferred an appeal being Appeal No.99 of 2006 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad. The appellate Court was pleased to dismiss the said appeal. Hence, the present revision. 5.0 Heard learned Advocates for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. In this matter, on 24.10.2007 this Court(Coram: C.K. Buch,J.) passed following order, CR.RA/207/2007 5/7 JUDGMENT “Mr. B.M. Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant submits that 6 depositors are present before the Court and they have been paid the entire sum with interest calculated till the date on which they have been paid and that nothing has been deducted from their legitimate entitlement as per the agreement that was there between the depositors and the accused etc. It is submitted that the other depositors are also likely to see that they receive the amount and that they are otherwise not interested in keeping the applicant-accused in prison for long. Mr. Gupta submits that this exercise would take some more time and therefore, he requests for time which is granted and the matter is adjourned to 22nd November, 2007 so that Mr. Gupta can produce the document containing the signatures of each of the depositors and copies of the original receipts given to each of such depositors. No further adjournment shall be granted on the next date. Interim relief granted earlier now shall continue till 22nd November, 2007.” 6.0 From the above it transpires that six depositors have been paid their due amount along with interest and that the remaining depositors are also interested in their money only and that they are not interested in keeping the applicant behind the bars. 7.0 Today, Mr. Gupta has submitted that out CR.RA/207/2007 6/7 JUDGMENT of total nine depositors, eight depositors have already been paid their legitimate amounts along with interest and that now only an amount of Rs.2,100/- remains to be paid to a depositor i.e. one Ms. Urvashiben Barot. It is submitted that since Ms. Urvashiben Barot is not available at her residence, the aforesaid amount could not be paid to her. 8.0 In above view of the matter and in view of the fact that the applicant has been in jail for about three years and that now only one depositors remains to be paid an amount of Rs.2,100/- with interest by the applicant, the application deserves to be partly allowed. 9.0 In the result, the revision is partly allowed. The order of sentence and fine imposed by the trial Court for conviction under Sections 420, 120(B) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code is modified to the effect that so far as the conviction under Section 420 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code is concerned, the sentence of 4 CR.RA/207/2007 7/7 JUDGMENT years imposed by the trial Court is reduced to the period of IMPRISONMENT, ALREADY UNDERGONE by the applicant and that the applicant shall pay fine of Rs.1,000/- only instead of Rs.5,000/-. So far as the conviction under Section 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code is concerned the same is also modified, the sentence of 4 years imposed by the trial Court is reduced to the period of IMPRISONMENT, ALREADY UNDERGONE by the applicant and the applicant shall pay fine of Rs.1,000/- only instead of Rs.5,000/-. So far as conviction of the applicant under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 to 5 of the Prize Chit & Money Circulation Banning Act and the fine imposed by the trial Cort are concerned, the sentence and fine imposed qua the same stands confirmed. Punishments shall run concurrently. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. (M.D. Shah,J.) Umesh/