Nasib Hussain Siddi
& Ors. Vs. State of Gujarat
O R D E R
T.S. THAKUR, J.
appeal arises out of an order passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad
whereby conviction of the appellants for offences punishable under Sections 325,
506(2), 333, 342 and 114 IPC has been affirmed and the - sentence reduced to imprisonment
for a period of 1= years.
the special leave petition came up for admission, this Court by its order dated
1st August, 2011 issued notice to the respondents only on the question of sentence.
We are not, therefore, examining the validity of the order of conviction which both
the Courts below have passed on a proper appreciation of the evidence on
record. The only question on which we have heard learned counsel for the parties
is whether the sentence awarded to the appellants needs to be reduced and, if
so, to what extent.
genesis of the case of the appellants lies in an incident that took place on 7th
September, 2003 at village Chitrod in the District of Kutch, State of Gujarat. The
complainant in the case was, during the relevant period, a Constable posted at Chitrod
outpost of Police Station Bhimasar. The prosecution case is that at about 10.30
a.m. on 7th September, 2003 when the complainant was on patrol duty, he found one
Babubhai quarrelling in public place with one Hussain Ibrahim Siddi, accused
no.1. The - constable appears to have accosted the quarrelling duo and asked them
as to why they were disturbing peace and ordered them to accompany him to the
police station. This appears to have infuriated Hussain Ibrahim Siddi who caught
hold of the Constable from his collar and pushed him. In the meantime the son,
wife and mother of Hussain Ibrahim Siddi also appear to have joined Hussain Ibrahim
Siddi, exchanged hot words with constable and prevented him from taking Hussain
Ibrahim Siddi to the Police Station. It was on those allegations that Hussain Ibrahim
and the appellants were tried together for the offences mentioned earlier.
the trial the prosecution examined as many as 13 witnesses to support its case.
The depositions of these witnesses were found reliable by the Trial Court
resulting in the conviction of Hussain Ibrahim for the offence punishable under
Section 325 and sentence of five years RI besides a fine of Rs.500/-. In default
he was directed to undergo a further sentence of six months. He was also convicted
under Section 506(2) of the IPC and sentenced to -undergo imprisonment for a
period of five years and a fine of Rs.500/- and in default to undergo further
imprisonment for a period of six months. Hussain Ibrahim was in addition convicted
and sentenced to imprisonment for five years and a fine of Rs.500/- under Section
333 and in default to undergo further imprisonment of six months. Imprisonment for
a period of one year and a fine of Rs.100/- was awarded to him under Section 342
of the IPC and in default to undergo further imprisonment for a period of one
so far as the appellants Hussain Siddi, Malubai wife of Ibrahim Siddi and
Hawabai wife of Hussain Ibrahim are concerned, the Trial Court found them also
to be guilty of offences punishable under Sections 333 of the IPC and sentenced
them to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three years and a fine of Rs.200/-.
Malubai accused no.3 and appellant before us was also in addition convicted and
sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of three years under Section
506(2) IPC apart from 4a fine of Rs.500/-. In default of payment of fine she
was sentenced to undergo six months further imprisonment. -7. Aggrieved by the orders
of conviction and sentence the appellants preferred an appeal before the High
Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad who has while upholding the conviction of the
appellants reduced the sentence awarded to all of them to 1= years instead of
is common ground that the appellants, two of whom happen to be females had not physically
assaulted the constable. Even appellant no.1 is not alleged to have used any
force against the constable in the incident in question. The incident itself is
nearly ten years old by now. Keeping in view all these circumstances and the fact
that Hussain Ibrahim Siddi accused no.1 who was mainly responsible for the grievous
injury caused to the constable has already served the sentence awarded to him,
we are of the opinion that interest of justice would be sufficiently served if the
sentence awarded to the appellants is modified and reduced to the sentence
already undergone by them.
order accordingly. The appellants shall be set at liberty forthwith unless required
in any other case. The appeal is allowed to the above extent.
Pages: 1 2