Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CR.A/889/1994 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL
APPEAL No. 889 of 1994
With
CRIMINAL
APPEAL No. 901 of 1994
=========================================================
KAMRUDDIN
SHAIKH - Appellant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT - Opponent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
CRIMINAL
APPEAL No. 889 of 1994
MR
YU MALIK for
Appellant(s) : 1, MR MM TIRMIZI for
Appellant(s) : 1,
MS MANISHA L. SHAH, APP for Opponent(s) :
1,
CRIMINAL
APPEAL No. 901 of 1994
MR
MM TIRMIZI for Appellant No.2
MR
KJ PANCHAL for Appellant No.3
MS MANISHA L. SHAH, APP for
Opponent(s) : 1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE MD SHAH
Date
: 18/06/2010
ORDER
BELOW NOTE FOR SPEAKING TO MINUTES
This
speaking to minutes has been taken out by Mr.M.M.Tirmizi, learned
advocate for the original accused for correcting the judgment dated
15-12-2009 passed in Cri.Appeal No.889 of 2004 with Criminal Appeal
No.901 of 1994. It is submitted that original accused were acquitted
for the offence punishable under Sec.307 of IPC and conviction was
altered from Sec.307 of IPC to Sec.324 and 332 of IPC. It is further
submitted that learned advocate, Mr.K.J.Panchal has argued the
matter on behalf of the original accused No.3 in Criminal Appeal
No.901 of 1994 at length when appeal was heard. However, his name
was not shown as the learned advocate appearing for the original
accused No.3 in the judgment. It is jointly submitted that the
accused
have already undergone sentence of three months. However, instead of
mentioning as three months rigorous imprisonment in paras 12 and 14
of the order, it has been mentioned as one year. It is therefore
submitted that the order may be corrected accordingly.
It
appears that instead of mentioning as three months it has been
mentioned as one year in paras 12 and 14 of the judgment dated
15-12-2009 passed in Cri.Appeal No.889 of 2004 with Criminal Appeal
No.901 of 1994. Hence, the aforesaid judgment has to be corrected to
that extent.
Under
the circumstances, the words one year as mentioned in line
No.2 of para 12 of the judgment dated 15-12-2009 passed in
Cri.Appeal No.889 of 2004 with Criminal Appeal No.901 of 1994 are
corrected to read as three months . The words and figure
Mr.K.J.Panchal, learned advocate appeared for the original
accused No.3. may be added at the end of para 7 of the judgment.
However, the words one year for as mentioned in line No.12 of
Para 14 of the judgment are deleted. Office to issue a fresh writ
accordingly.
This
speaking to minutes stands allowed accordingly.
(M.D.SHAH,J.)
radhan
Top