Allowed

Babu Bhai @ Pagdiwala Baba v. State

Rajasthan HC9 Jan 2014CRLA/183/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal against conviction under Section 376(2)(F) IPC sentenced to 10 years RI. Appellant, aged about 70, suffering from old age diseases and being poor, sought early release. Court declined pre-existing jail period relief but granted benefit of Section 433 CrPC.

What did the court decide?

Appeal disposed with direction to jail authorities to give benefit of Section 433 CrPC to the appellant.

Babu Bhai @ Pagdiwala Baba Vs State — Bail and Remand | Rajasthan HC (2014)

¶1

S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 183/2008 (Babu Bhai @ Pagdiwala Baba vs. State of Raj.)

¶2

Date of Judgment :: 9^th January, 2014

¶3

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA

¶4

Mr. Vinay Pal Yadav,for the appellant Mr. Peeyush Kumar, Public Prosecutor for the State

¶5

¶6

This Cr. (Jail) Appeal has been filed by the appellant against the judgment dated 25^th August, 2007, passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Kekri, District Ajmer in Sessions Case No. 15/2007, whereby the accused appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 376 (2)(F) IPC and sentenced to undergo 10 years' RI with fine of Rs. 10,000/-; in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 1 year's SI.

¶7

Without going into the merits of the case, learned counsel for the appellant has contended that he is not challenging the conviction and sentence part of the judgment of the court below, but he is only requesting to this Court that looking to the fact that age of the accused appellant is about 70 years and he is suffering from old age diseases and he is a poor person, hence either he should be released for the period already undergone by him in confinement and if not, then the benefit of Section 433 CrPC should be given to the accused appellant.

¶8

Learned public prosecutor has opposed the same.

¶9

Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not think it proper to release the accused appellant for the period already undergone by him in confinement, but looking to the age of the accused

¶10

appellant and that he is a poor person, I deem it just and proper to give the benefit of Section 433 CrPC to the accused appellant.

¶11

Consequently, this appeal is disposed of with the direction to concerned jail authorities to give benefit of Section 433 CrPc to the appellant, in accordance with law.

¶12

(Mahesh Chandra Sharma) J.

¶13

DK/

¶14

All corrections made in the judgment / order have been incorporated in the judgment / order being E-mailed. Dilip Khandelwal PA

Babu Bhai @ Pagdiwala Baba v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babu Bhai @ Pagdiwala Baba v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jitendra Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Ram Avtar Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

J v v N Ltd. Vs State and Ors.

Mohammad Shakil and Ors. Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Sant Kumar and Ors. Vs State

Smt.Ganga Bai Ramchandra Lama Vs State