JAGADISHBHAI GHELABHAI RATHODversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

   R/CR.RA/360/2018                           JUDGMENT DATED: 02/04/2026




IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

 R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST CONVICTION) NO.
                        360 of 2018


FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
==========================================================
        Approved for Reporting               Yes        No
                                                         √
==========================================================
            JAGADISHBHAI GHELABHAI RATHOD & ORS.
                               Versus
                        STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
HCLS COMMITTEE(4998) for the applicants(s) No. 1
MR AMIT R JOSHI(6682) for the Applicants(s) No. 1,2,3,4
MS SHRUTI PATHAK, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
  CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR

                         Date : 02/04/2026
                          JUDGMENT

[1.0] By way of present revision application under Sections 397 read
with 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicants –
accused have prayed for quashing and setting aside the judgment and
order of conviction and sentence dated 07.02.2018 passed by the
learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Manavadar , in Criminal Case
No.327 of 2013, whereby the learned trial Court has been pleased to
hold the applicant No.1 guilty for the offences punishable under
Sections 323, 324 read with Section 114 of the Indian Penal Code,
1860 (which shall hereinafter be referred to as “IPC” for short) read
with Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act and sentenced to undergo
simple imprisonment for three years and also directed to pay fine of



                              Page 1 of 4
   R/CR.RA/360/2018                               JUDGMENT DATED: 02/04/2026




Rs.200/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further simple
imprisonment for 5 days whereas applicant No.2 is convicted for the
offence under Section 323 of the IPC read with Section 135 of the
Gujarat Police Act and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for
a period of one month with fine of Rs.100/- and in default of payment
of fine, to undergo further simple imprisonment for a period of 5 days
and applicant Nos.3 and 4 are convicted for the offence under Section
323 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a
period of one month with fine of Rs.100/- and in default of payment of
fine, to undergo further simple imprisonment for a period of 5 days.
The said order was assailed by way of filing Criminal Appeal No.115 of
2014, wherein, vide judgment dated 07.02.2018 passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Junagadh, the appeal came to be dismissed
and the order of conviction has been confirmed and upheld by the
concerned Additional District Judge. Hence, the present Revision
Application is filed by the applicants-accused.

[2.0] Heard learned Advocate Mr. Amit Joshi for the applicants and
learned APP Ms. Shruti Pathak for the respondent – State.

[3.0] At the outset, the applicants – accused are convicted for the
offences punishable under Sections 323 and allied offence of the IPC
and there are concurrent findings of both the Courts below. The
applicants have committed the offence for the first time and hence,
the learned Advocate for the applicants has prayed to extend the
benefit of probation to the applicants. This Court vide order dated
12.03.2026, has called for report of Probation Officer, Junagadh in
compliance of which the Chief Probation Officer, Junagadh, has
submitted the report dated 27.03.2026, which is taken on record. As
per the said report the conduct of present applicants is good and


                                Page 2 of 4
   R/CR.RA/360/2018                             JUDGMENT DATED: 02/04/2026




Probation Officer has also recommended to extend the benefit of
probation to the applicants. Furthermore, 13 years have passed since
the date of the incident and during these period the applicants did not
indulge in any further crime and report of Probation Officer also
suggest good conduct of the applicants.

[4.0] Now, while exercising jurisdiction under Section 401 of the Code
is discretionary and it is required to be used only in exceptional cases
where glaring defect in the procedure and manifest error of law or
there has been miscarriage of justice. Here no any such error is
pointed out or no perversity is found from the reasons assigned by the
learned Sessions Judge. Hence, the learned Sessions Judge has not
committed any error in coming to the conclusion. Even in revisional
jurisdiction the Court has to be more careful in re-appreciating the
fact or evidence as revisional jurisdiction itself does not provide re-
appreciation of evidence and considering the limited jurisdiction the
Court cannot act as Appellate Court. Hence, no case is made out for
interference with the impugned findings in light of scope of the scope
of revision laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Amit Kapoor Vs.
Ramesh Chander, reported in 2012 (9) SCC 460.

[4.1] However, one of the prime consideration under the penology is
reformative approach. The Court has to also consider the possibility of
rehabilitation and reformation of offender and therefore, the
discretion given to the Court while awarding the sentence under
Section 360(1)(iii) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and to consider
the provision of Probation of Offenders Act. Considering the aforesaid
fact, in order to permit rehabilitation of offender, without finding
their communal conscience and to secure the societal interest and
justice, Court should prefer the reformative approach instead of


                                Page 3 of 4
    R/CR.RA/360/2018                                                          JUDGMENT DATED: 02/04/2026




inflicting higher or harsher punishment.

[5.0] In view of above, the applicants – accused are directed to be
released on probation of good conduct under Section 4 of the
Probation of Offenders Act, upon execution of probation bond in sum
of Rs.20,000/- each, with one surety of like amount for a period of one
(1) year.

[6.0] It is hereby further directed that the applicants – accused shall
receive the sentence as and when called upon till the said period and
the applicants shall maintain peace during above mentioned period of
one (1) year.

[6.1] The above mentioned bond under Section 4 of the Probation of
Offenders Act be submitted before the learned trial Court within 15
days of passing of this judgment.

[7.0] Accordingly, present revision application is disposed of. Record
and proceedings, if any, be sent back to the concerned Court
forthwith. Rule accordingly.
                                                                                         Sd/-
                                                                       (HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.)
Ajay
  Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
  Digitally signed by: AJAY CHANDRAN MENON(HC00939), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 02/04/2026 18:34:58




                                                   Page 4 of 4