Gujarat High Court
Gautam Devjibhai Rathod vs State Of Gujarat on 5 March, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/SCR.A/6821/2017 ORDER DATED: 05/03/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (QUASHING) NO. 6821 of 2017
==========================================================
GAUTAM DEVJIBHAI RATHOD
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MAULIK NANAVATI FOR NANAVATI & CO.(7105) for Applicant(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3
MR MANAN MAHETA, ADDL.PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI
Date : 05/03/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The instant petition is filed praying the following reliefs :
"(a) To pass an order quashing and setting aside the communication dated 19.06.2017 sent from the Office of the Additional Director General and Inspector General (Prisons), Gujarat State to the Superintendent of Lajpore Central Jail, Surat and the consequential communication dated 26.06.2017 sent by the Superintendent of Lajpore Central Jail, Surat, including the decision contained therein that petitioner has been wrongly granted the benefit of remission by the State Government and erroneously ordered to be released prematurely from jail even though he has been sentenced to life imprisonment in 02 criminal cases and calling upon him to surrender in jail, and confirm his premature release from jail as being in accordance with law;
(b) To pass an ex parte ad interim order staying the operation and execution of the communication dated 19.06.2017 sent from the Office of the Additional Director General and Inspector General (Prisons), Gujarat State to the Superintendent of Lajpore Central Jail, Surat and the consequential communication dated 26.06.2017 sent by the Superintendent of Lajpore Central Jail, Surat, and restrain the police from arresting the petitioner on the basis of the said communication or decision contained in the said communication;"Page 1 of 5 Uploaded by GAURAV J THAKER(HC00951) on Wed Mar 05 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 05 22:30:47 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/6821/2017 ORDER DATED: 05/03/2025 undefined
2. The brief facts of the case are as under.
2.1 The petitioner was arrested in connection with FIR No.567 of 1987 with Ellis Bridge Police Station, Ahmedabad and petitioner was tried in Sessions Case No.127 of 1989 before learned Sessions Court, Ahmedabad. Learned Sessions Court found him guilty and sentenced him to life imprisonment by judgment and order dated 30.06.1993.The unsuccessfully challenged the said order before this Court and Hon'ble Supreme Court. The petitioner was also tried in Sessions Case No.99 of 2002 before Sessions Court, Bharuch, which acquitted the petitioner vide judgment and order dated 31.01.2006. The petitioner preferred Criminal Appeal No.1125 of 2009 before Hon'ble Supreme Court which came to be allowed vide judgment and order dated 25.04.2014. The petitioner came to be released on 26.01.2017 pursuant to decision of State Government. The office of Additional Director General and Inspector General (Prisons), sent letter dated 19.06.2017 an Superintendent of Lajpore Central Jail, sent letter dated 26.06.2017 informing the petitioner that he has been wrongly granted the benefit of remission. Hence, this petition.
3. Heard learned advocate Mr.Maulik Nanavati appearing for the petitioner and learned APP Mr.Manan Maheta appearing for the respondent - State.
4. Essentially, the challenge is made to the order placed at Annexure-A1 whereby State Government has withdrawn the benefit of remission granted to the present petitioner on the ground that he is facing the offence under Section 323 of IPC in Page 2 of 5 Uploaded by GAURAV J THAKER(HC00951) on Wed Mar 05 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 05 22:30:47 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/6821/2017 ORDER DATED: 05/03/2025 undefined Criminal Case No.2001151 of 1995 and it was not came to the notice while the order of remission was passed.
5. Putting the entire facts to the notice of this Court, learned advocate Mr.Nanavati would submit that the present petitioner has been convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 324 of IPC in Sessions Case No.127 of 1989 by the City Civil and Sessions Court. The punishment of life imprisonment was awarded on 30.06.1993. The petitioner unsuccessfully preferred criminal appeal and SLP before this Court and Hon'ble Supreme Court, respectively. The petitioner suffered incarceration for almost 19 years and thereafter, the petitioner was released on 26.01.2017 by giving the benefit of remission on the 68th Republic Day.
6. Learned advocate Mr.Nanavati would further submit that another case being Sessions Case No.99 of 2002 was tried against the present petitioner for principle offence under Section 364A along with other offences. Learned Sessions Court found that the prosecution failed to prove charges against the petitioner and as such acquitted the present petitioner from the charges levelled in Sessions Case. Criminal Appeal No.1326 of 2006 had been preferred by the State which was allowed and acquittal recorded by the learned Sessions Court was reversed. The petitioner challenged the said order of this Court before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. While setting aside the order of this Court, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has remanded back the matter to this Court for fresh hearing of the criminal appeal. Accordingly, the criminal appeal is pending for hearing. Lastly, Page 3 of 5 Uploaded by GAURAV J THAKER(HC00951) on Wed Mar 05 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 05 22:30:47 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/6821/2017 ORDER DATED: 05/03/2025 undefined learned advocate Mr.Nanavati would submit that Criminal Case No.2001151 of 1995 was lodged against the petitioner pursuant to the chargesheet filed in C.R. No.I-171 of 1995 registered with the Vejalpur Police Station, Ahmedabad for the offence punishable under Section 323 of IPC. Since the pendency of this case has not been noticed by the concerned authority while extending the benefit of remission, having been found the pendency of the case, the concerned authority had withdrawn the benefit of remission by Annexure-A1. Learned advocate Mr.Nanavati submits that in this criminal case, learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad acquitted the accused on 29.07.2024. He places on record the order passed by the learned 6th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad city. He would further submit that there is no record which may establish that appeal has been preferred by the State challenging the acquittal. In view of above, he would submit that the matter may be remanded back to the concerned authority for re-affirming grant of benefit of remission to the present petitioner in view of the subsequent developments. Learned advocate while arguing so would submit that the petitioner would be bound by the outcome of the Criminal Appeal No.1326 of 2006 pending for hearing before this Court subject to all his rights available under the law.
7. Learned APP in this given facts and circumstances of the case, would submit to pass necessary orders.
8. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the entire case and the chronology of events stated hereinabove, according to this Court, in the fact situation, order at Page 4 of 5 Uploaded by GAURAV J THAKER(HC00951) on Wed Mar 05 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 05 22:30:47 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/SCR.A/6821/2017 ORDER DATED: 05/03/2025 undefined Annexure-A1 for withdrawing the benefit of remission is required to be reviewed by the authority concerned. The petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to prefer a fresh application before the concerned authority for seeking remission based upon this order and putting all other facts to the notice of the authority within four weeks from today. The stay by way of ad-interim relief granted by this Court vide order dated 07.09.2017 shall continue to operate till the concerned authority decides the fresh application for remission. Rule is made absolute, in aforesaid terms. Direct service is permitted.
(J. C. DOSHI, J) GAURAV J THAKER Page 5 of 5 Uploaded by GAURAV J THAKER(HC00951) on Wed Mar 05 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Mar 05 22:30:47 IST 2025