PATEL KANTILAL DHARMSHIBHAIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

   R/CR.RA/577/2009                                   JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026




IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
         R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 577 of 2009


FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
==========================================================
         Approved for Reporting               Yes No
                                                   √
==========================================================
                  PATEL KANTILAL DHARMSHIBHAI
                                Versus
                         STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR Y J PATEL(3985) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS MONALI BHATT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
  CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR

                                Date : 08/04/2026
                                 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 order of
conviction and sentence dated 10.01.2008 passed by the learned
Additional      Civil   Judge    and    Judicial    Magistrate     First    Class,
Surendranagar in Criminal Case No.1447 of 2002, whereby the learned
trial Court has been pleased to hold the applicant guilty for the
oAences punishable under Sections 323 and 325 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 six months and also directed to pay
Gne of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of Gne to undergo further
simple imprisonment for one month for the oAence under Section 323



                                    Page 1 of 4
   R/CR.RA/577/2009                            JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026




of the IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one
year with Gne of Rs.1000/- and in default of payment of Gne to
undergo further simple imprisonment of three months for the oAence
under Section 325 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo simple
imprisonment for six months with Gne of Rs.200/- and in default of
payment of Gne to undergo further simple imprisonment of one
month for the oAence under Section 135 of the G.P. Act. The said
order was assailed by way of Gling Criminal Appeal No.4 of 2008,
wherein, vide judgment dated 08.09.2009 passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track, the appeal came to be partly
allowed and applicant – accused was acquitted for the oAence under
Section 135 of the GP Act whereas conviction and sentence for the
oAence under Section 323 and 325 of the IPC was conGrmed. Hence,
the present Revision Application is Gled by the applicant-accused.

[2.0] Heard learned Advocate Mr. Y.J. Patel for the applicant and
learned APP Ms. Monali Bhatt for the respondent – State.

[3.0] At the outset, the applicant – accused is convicted for the
oAences punishable under Sections 323 and 325 of the IPC and there
are concurrent Gndings of both the Courts below. The applicant has
committed the oAence for the Grst time and hence, the learned
Advocate for the applicant has prayed to extend the beneGt of
probation to the applicants. This Court vide order dated 18.03.2026,
has called for report of Probation OKcer, Surendranagar in
compliance of which the Chief Probation OKcer, Surendranagar, has
submitted the report dated 01.04.2026, which is taken on record. As
per the said report the conduct of present applicant is good and
Probation OKcer has also recommended to extend the beneGt of
probation to the applicant. Furthermore, 24 years have passed since


                               Page 2 of 4
   R/CR.RA/577/2009                             JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026




the date of the incident and during this period the applicant did not
indulge in any further crime and report of Probation OKcer also
suggest good conduct of the applicant.

[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 Gndings 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 oAender 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 OAenders Act. Considering the aforesaid
fact, in order to permit rehabilitation of oAender, without Gnding
their communal conscience and to secure the societal interest and
justice, Court should prefer the reformative approach instead of
inMicting higher or harsher punishment.




                                Page 3 of 4
   R/CR.RA/577/2009                                                          JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026




[5.0] In view of above, the applicant – accused is directed to be
released on probation of good conduct under Section 4 of the
Probation of OAenders 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 applicant – accused shall
receive the sentence as and when called upon till the said period and
the applicant shall maintain peace during above mentioned period of
one (1) year.

[6.1] The above mentioned bond under Section 4 of the Probation of
OAenders 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 08/04/2026 18:05:19




                                                   Page 4 of 4