CR.A/41/1998 1/5 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 41 of 1998 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.BUCH HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.N.PATEL ========================================= 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 ? ========================================= RAVSAHEB @ RAVIRAJ VIKRAM PATIL - Appellant Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & 1 - Opponents ========================================= Appearance : MR US BRAHMBHATT for the Appellants. MS D.S.PANDIT, APP for the Opponent. ========================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.BUCH and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE DN PATEL Date : 29/12/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT CR.A/41/1998 2/5 JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE DN PATEL) 1. This Criminal Appeal has been preferred against the judgement and order of conviction and sentence dated 31st December,1997 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Surat in Sessions Case No.15 of 1997, whereby the present appellants have been convicted for an offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/-, in case of default, further simple imprisonment for six months has been awarded. The appellants have also been convicted for an offence punishable under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in case of default, further simple imprisonment for three months has been awarded. Against this judgement and order, the present appeal has been preferred by the appellants. 2. The appellants are facing charge of committing murder of Sunanda – wife of accused No.1. Deceased was forced to bring money from her parental house. Likewise, on 4th November,1996, when appellant no.1 told her to prepare break-fast, deceased replied that it will take some time and, therefore, appellants set the deceased to fire. This is a charge, which they are facing in Sessions Case No.15 of 1997. CR.A/41/1998 3/5 JUDGMENT 3. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that appellant No.1 is absconding, as per report dated 23rd April,2002 given by Inspector General of Police and also as per the report dated 28th April,2008 recently received from Baroda Central Jail. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that appellant No.2 has expired on 12nd October,2003. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced death certificate of appellant no.2 and submitted that death of appellant no.2 has been registered at Village: Mangrul, Taluka: Parola, District: Jalgaon, Maharashtra. A photocopy of the same is taken on the record of the case. 4. Looking to the aforesaid submission and looking to the fact that appellant No.2 has expired, appeal qua appellant no.2 is abated. 5. In view of the judgement delivered by this Court vide order dated 17th November,2008 passed in Criminal Appeal No.1375 of 1993 read with judgement dated 23rd October,2008 delivered by this Division Bench in Criminal Appeal No.1131 of 1997, as the appellant No.1 is absconding, appeal qua appellant No.1 deserves to be dismissed. CR.A/41/1998 4/5 JUDGMENT 6. In the decision dated 23rd October,2008 rendered by this Division Bench in Criminal Appeal No.1131 of 1997, it has been observed in para-8(vi) and 8(vii), as under: “8. (vi) ....... Thus, deliberate action or positive action reveals the intention of the appellant which shows that he has no respect to the Constitution of India and he has committed breach of the fundamental duty enshrined under Sub-article (a) of Article 51-A of the Constitution of India or it also reveals intention of the appellant that he has no faith in justice delivery system. ......... ........ Those, who are expecting their criminal appeals against conviction, to be heard on merits, cannot remain absconding. ..... (vii) ..... This appeal is hereby dismissed only on the ground that the appellant-accused is absconding and is not available to the Court, nor is present in the Court. As and when he surrenders or is arrested by the police, he may prefer an application for restoration of the appeal. We do not want to encourage the absconding accused for remaining absconding by hearing his criminal appeal on merits. It also encourages, who are in jail to jump the bail or furlough. Leniency shown towards criminals is a threat to innocent persons......” (Emphasis supplied) 7. In view of the aforesaid decision and also keeping in mind the fact that the appellant No.1- original accused No.1 is absconding, the present appeal qua appellant No.1 is dismissed only on this ground. As and when appellant No.1 -original accused No.1 surrenders to the jail authority or is arrested by the police, he is at liberty to prefer an application for revival of this appeal and if such application is not unreasonably excessively time-barred as stated in the aforesaid judgement, then, this Criminal Appeal will be revived or restored. CR.A/41/1998 5/5 JUDGMENT 8. For the aforesaid reasons, as appellant No.1 – original accused no.1 is absconding, appeal qua appellant no.1 is dismissed. So far as appellant No.2 is concerned, as appellant No.2 has expired, the appeal qua appellant No.2 is treated as abated. This Criminal Appeal is hereby disposed of accordingly. [C.K.BUCH,J] [D.N.PATEL,J] *dipti