(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL)
1. This Court on 23.10.2012, passed the following order:
"The present application has been preferred by the State for leave to prefer appeal against the judgment and order dated 30th July 2011 passed by the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Jamnagar in Sessions Case No.164 of 2000 whereby the original accused No.2 has been acquitted from the charge of Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and has only been convicted for the offence under Section 201 of IPC.
We have considered the evidence on record. We have considered the judgment and reasons recorded by the learned Sessions Judge and we have heard learned APP for the State. It is true that the crime committed for causing death by CC/11/2011 2/4 ORDER original accused No.1 is serious and it was heinous crime in which the learned Sessions Judge has already imposed death sentence upon accused No.1 for which conviction case is pending before this Court. However, so far as accused No.2 is concerned, the reliable evidence which came on record is that he has brought salt and has further facilitated original accused No.1 for destroying the evidence, but all such actions are after the death was caused of the deceased. On the aspect of destroying of the evidence, the learned Sessions Judge found that the offence was proved and the sentence has been imposed of seven years' RI against which, as stated by the learned APP, the appeal has been preferred and the same is pending. However, so far as charge of Section 302 is concerned, the learned APP has not been able to show any material evidence on the basis of which it can be said that accused No.2 has played any role in causing the death of the deceased. The allegation that when accused No.1 committed the crime, accused No.2 remained in hidden position for ensuring that nobody may intervene has not been proved by any material and reliable evidence. Under these circumstances, if the learned Sessions Judge has found that the prosecution has not been able to prove the case against original accused No.2 for the offence under Section 302 of IPC, the same cannot be said as erroneous. Under the circumstances, leave does not deserve to be granted and therefore the same is not granted. However, it is observed that rights and contentions of original accused No.2 in the appeal against the judgment in appeal for his conviction shall remain open.
CC/11/2011 3/4 ORDER Application is disposed of accordingly."
2. Thereafter, a report has been submitted by the Office and as per the said report, it has been stated that two copies of Paper Book for Division Bench, one copy of the Paper Book for each cases, one copy of the Paper Book for Government Pleader, four to five copies for sending it to the Hon'ble Supreme Court are prepared than the purpose would be served. Even if the matter is considered, keeping in view the aspect of Mercy Petition, which may be made before the Hon'ble President, then also, at the most, it may require one or two copies more. Under the circumstances, it appears that preparation of 10(TEN) copies would serve the purpose.
3. In view of the above, it appears that there would not be any rationale in preparing 35 copies of the Paper Book, as provided by Rule 344 of the Gujarat High Court Rules. It is hardly required to be stated that if there is no requirement for such number of copies of the Paper Books in confirmation cases, the preparation of additional copies would resulting into waste of time, money and government stationery too. Hence, Rule 344 of the Gujarat High Court Rules is required to be considered by way of a fresh look, keeping in view the present CC/11/2011 4/4 ORDER scenario, and it is required to be examined, as to whether Rule 344 requiring preparation of 35 copies deserves amendment or not.
4. Hence, office is directed to place the matter before Hon'ble the Chief Justice on administrative side for considering the aspect, as to whether Rule 344 of the Gujarat High Court Rules for preparation of 35 copies is required to be amended by reducing the number of copies by 10 or otherwise. S.O. to 27TH DECEMBER, 2012.
(JAYANT PATEL, J.) (MOHINDER PAL, J.) Umesh/