SANKARBHAI RAMJIBHAI PATEL vs STATE OF GUJARAT
- Court
- Gujarat High Court
R/CR.RA/47/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/07/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST
CONVICTION) NO. 47 of 2019
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE --Sd/-
======================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✔
======================================
SANKARBHAI RAMJIBHAI PATEL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
======================================
Appearance:
MR HR PRAJAPATI(674) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. YUVRAJ BRAHMBHATT, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
======================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE NISHA M. THAKORE
Date : 10/07/2026
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Heard Mr. H.R. Prajapati, learned advocate on record
for the applicant - original accused. Mr. Yuvraj Brahmbhatt,
learned APP, has appeared on behalf of the respondent –
State.
2. The present revision application is filed under Section
Page 1 of 9
Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Mon Jul 13 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 13 18:06:59 IST 2026
R/CR.RA/47/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/07/2026
397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
th
1973, against the judgment and order dated 16 January 2019
th
passed by the learned 5 Addl. Sessions Judge, Mehsana at
Visnagar in Criminal Appeal no.7 of 2018, confirming the
th
judgment and order dated 16 January 2018 passed by the
learned Addl. Judicial Magistrate First Class, Visnagar in
Criminal Case no.940 of 2010. By the said impugned
judgment and order, the learned Session Judge has confirmed
the order of conviction passed against the present applicant
for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the Essential
Commodities Act, 1955, and has also confirmed the sentence
of 6 months rigourous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.5,000/-,
failing which the learned Magistrate has directed the
applicant to undergo an additional sentence of 15 days simple
imprisonment. Hence, the present revision application at the
instance of the applicant - original accused.
3. Considering the grounds raised in the revision memo
and the submissions made by learned advocate for the
applicant, the learned Single Judge of this Court vide order
st
dated 21 January 2019 had admitted the present revision
application. The interim relief in terms of para 8(b) was
Page 2 of 9
Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Mon Jul 13 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 13 18:06:59 IST 2026
R/CR.RA/47/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/07/2026
granted on condition. The learned Single Judge by the said
order has thus suspended the sentence and has enlarged the
applicant on bail, pending the hearing and final disposal of the
present revision application.
4. The matter was notified under special assignment Board
of old matters. With the able assistance of learned advocates
appearing for the respective parties, the matter was heard.
5. Learned advocate appearing for the applicant at the
outset has submitted that the applicant has reached the age of
71 years and he is suffering from age-related ailments. He
has therefore urged this Court that considering the nature of
offence, his case may be considered for grant of probation.
The attention of this Court was invited to the findings and
reasons assigned by the Courts below, it was pointed-out that
though initially the complaint was lodged with regard to
storage of kerosene beyond the permissible limits, the trial
Court on appreciation of evidence had acquitted the present
applicant for the offence alleged in respect to the aforesaid
allegation. However, the applicant has been found guilty for
the offence under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act,
Page 3 of 9
Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Mon Jul 13 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 13 18:06:59 IST 2026
R/CR.RA/47/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/07/2026
and has been imposed sentence.
5.1 Learned advocate for the applicant has relied upon the
provisions of Section 360 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
as well as Section 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act and had
submitted that considering the nature of the offence, in case
where the sentence provided was up to seven years, this
Court can exercise its discretion to release the applicant on
probation on the ground of good conduct. It was submitted
that the present applicant is not involved in any other offence
and all throughout he has maintained law and order.
5.2 The reliance was placed on the decision of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court in the case of Harivallabha Vs. State of
Madhya Pradesh reported in 2005 (10) SCC 330 ; referring to
the said decision, the learned advocate had pointed-out that it
was a case where the appellant was convicted for the offence
under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, and
was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period
of three years with a fine of Rs.10,000/-. In the appeal before
the High Court, the conviction and sentence of fine was
upheld, however, the term period of imprisonment was
Page 4 of 9
Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Mon Jul 13 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 13 18:06:59 IST 2026
R/CR.RA/47/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/07/2026
reduced from three years to three months. The Hon'ble
Supreme Court considering the provisions of Section 360 of
the Code had exercised its discretion and had enlarged the
appellant on probation.
5.3 Similarly, in the case of Dhurukumar Kumar S/o.
Radhakishan Pitti Vs. State of Maharashtra , reported in 2017
(9) SCC 411; it was pointed-out that again in a case where the
accused was convicted for the offence under Section 7 of the
Essential Commodities Act, 1955, and awarded rigorous
imprisonment for three months with a fine of Rs.500/-, the
Hon'ble Supreme Court had exercised its discretion
considering the fact that the accused were first-time offenders
and no other antecedents were reported.
5.4 Lastly, learned advocate has placed reliance upon the
recent judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of
Tarak Nath Keshari Vs. State of West Bengal, reported in
2024 (13) SCC 384. It was pointed-out that though the
minimum sentence provided for the offence under Section 7 of
the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, being three months, the
Court has ruled out that the same will not be a hurdle for
Page 5 of 9
Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Mon Jul 13 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 13 18:06:59 IST 2026
R/CR.RA/47/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/07/2026
invoking provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act. Thus,
even a premature release was considered by the Court while
invoking the provisions of Section 4 of the Probation of
Offenders Act. Learned advocate has therefore urged this
Court to pass appropriate orders.
6. Mr. Brahmbhatt, learned APP appearing for the
respondent - State has objected to the aforesaid submissions
made by learned advocate appearing for the applicant.
6.1 Once again the attention of this Court was invited to the
concurrent findings and reasons assigned by both the Courts
convicting the present applicant. It was submitted that there
are concurrent findings of facts upholding the order and
therefore the order of conviction is required to be not
interfered with in revision jurisdiction.
7. Considering aforesaid submissions of the learned
advocate for the applicant, this Court had requested the
learned APP to verify about the antecedents of the applicant.
The report submitted by the concerned officer has been
placed on record confirming the fact that the applicant is not
Page 6 of 9
Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Mon Jul 13 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 13 18:06:59 IST 2026
R/CR.RA/47/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/07/2026
involved in any other offence except for the present one.
8. I have carefully considered the findings and reasons
assigned by both the Courts. I have also perused the
th
additional affidavit dated 6 July, 2026 submitted by the
applicant explaining the circumstances with regard to the
stock of four gas cylinders found from his premises. It is
submitted by the applicant that the aforesaid gas cylinders
belong to the related witnesses who have in fact subsequently
approached the concerned Court seeking release of
muddamal under Section 457 of the Code. It is also submitted
that the applicant is 71 years and is suffering from age-related
ailments for which he was hospitalized for a brief period and
is undergoing treatment currently.
9. Considering the overall circumstances on record, this
Court is inclined to accept the prayer of learned advocate for
the applicant for probation, considering the judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tarak Nath Keshari
(supra) , despite the fact that under the provisions of Section 7
of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, a minimum sentence
of three months has been provided in case of conviction,
Page 7 of 9
Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Mon Jul 13 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 13 18:06:59 IST 2026
R/CR.RA/47/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/07/2026
however, in special circumstances, the Court has ruled out
that a case of a convict can always be considered for
probation in light of provisions of Section 4 of the Probation of
Offenders Act. It is also required to be noted that in the case
of Dhurukumar S/o. Radhakishan (supra) and Harivallabha
(supra) , the convicts were punished for the offence committed
under Section 7 of the Act of 1955 and were directed to
undergo rigorous imprisonment. However, considering the
fact that no other antecedents were reported against the
convict, the Court had enlarged them on probation in view of
the provisions of Section 360 of the Code.
10. Considering the submission of learned advocate for the
applicant of the applicant being not involved in any other
offence and having conducted himself reasonably throughout
pending the proceedings, and considering the fact that after
the alleged incident the period of 18 years having passed, this
Court is inclined to exercise discretion conferred under
Section 360 of the Code.
11. For the foregoing reasons, the applicant is directed to be
released on probation in view of provisions of Section 360 of
the Code on entering into bonds and furnishing sureties
Page 8 of 9
Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Mon Jul 13 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 13 18:06:59 IST 2026
R/CR.RA/47/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/07/2026
before the trial Court to ensure that he will maintain peace
and good behavior for the remaining part of the period.
12. With these observations, the revision application stands
disposed of. Rule made absolute to the aforesaid extent .
13. The R. & P. are directed to be sent back to the
concerned trial Court .
Sd/-
(NISHA M. THAKORE, J.)
AMAR RATHOD.../sfs/10.07
Page 9 of 9
Uploaded by AMAR RATHOD(HC01074) on Mon Jul 13 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 13 18:06:59 IST 2026