Rule. Mr.Raval, learned APP appears and waives service of notice of rule for the respondents.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, so also considering the fact that both the learned counsel representing the parties requested that the instant matter may be disposed of, in line of the order dated 4.10.2010 passed in Special Criminal Application No.365 of 2010 by this Court (Annexure - C) as well as in line of the order dated 20.1.2012 in Special Crim.Appln. No.2038 of 2011, this matter is taken up for final hearing today.
Heard Mr.JM Shah, learned advocate for the petitioners and Mr.Raval, learned APP for the respondents.
Both the learned counsel representing the parties submit that the instant matter may be disposed of, in line of the order dated 20.1.2012 passed in Sp.Cr.A.No.2038 of 2011.
Relevant paragraphs 4,5 and 6 of order dated 20.1.2012 in Special Criminal Appln.No.2038 of 2011 runs as under:-
"4. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the applicant has invoked the fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India to get the benefits of the judgment and order dated 24/6/2005 rendered by a Division Bench of this Court in Letters Patent Appeal No. 498/2005 [Govindbhai Mansing Dabhi v/s. State of Gujarat reported in 2005 [3] G.L.H. 169]. It is further requested by the Ld. Counsel for the applicant that the remission may be granted for the period of under-trial imprisonment undergone by the applicant in this matter. It is further submitted that similarly situated prisoners were granted the benefit of remission, but the applicant was denied only because his under-trial imprisonment was not considered as actual imprisonment. My attention is also drawn to Govindbhai's case [supra], wherein this Court has held that a period of detention suffered by an accused prior to conviction should be taken into consideration while computing the period of actual imprisonment.
5. In the above view of the matter, the respondents are directed to reconsider the issue in light of the decision rendered by this Court in the case of Govindbhai Mansing Dabhi v/s. State of Gujarat reported in 2005 [3] G.L.H. 169. The respondents shall decide this issue at the earliest, preferably within 15 days from the date of receipt of communication of this order.
6. With the aforesaid observations, this petition stands disposed of. Rule is made absolute accordingly. DSP."
In above view of the matter, the respondents are directed to reconsider the issue in light of the decision rendered by this Court in the case of Govindbhai Mansing Dabhi V/s. State of Gujarat reported in 2005 (3) G.L.H. 169. The respondent shall decide this issue at the earliest, preferably within 15 days from the date of receipt of communication of this order.
With the aforesaid observation, this petition stands disposed of. Rule is made absolute accordingly. D.S permitted.
(J.C.UPADHYAYA, J.) (binoy) Top