Mr. Ojha, the learned counsel for the petitioner
submitted that the constitutional right of the petitioner to have a
copy of the judgment of conviction and challenge the order of
conviction is infringed. An endeavor was made to impress upon the
Court that there are two distinct parts in the judgment of conviction
and sentence. The judgment of conviction precedes the proceedings
which are conducted by trial Court to impose the sentence. At the
stage of delivery of judgment itself, a right to prefer an appeal
there against arises to the accused. The denial of the opportunity to
prefer an appeal against the order of conviction causes grave
prejudice to the right of the accused, urged Mr. Ojha.
Sub Section (1) of Section 363 envisages that the copy of the judgment shall immediately after the pronouncement of judgment be given to the accused free of cost, when the accused is sentenced to imprisonment. Had it been the intention of the legislature that a copy of the judgment be made available to the accused the moment the judgment of conviction, meaning thereby holding the accused guilty of a particular offence, is pronounced, the legislature would not have used in Sub Section (4) of Section 353 of the Code the expression that ‘the copy thereof shall be made available for the perusal of the parties or their pleaders free of costs.’
25. In view of the aforesaid provisions contained in the Code,
we are afraid to accede to the submission on behalf of the petitioner that there is either a constitutional or statutory right to prefer an appeal against the order holding the person guilty of offence. The provisions contained in Section 235 of the Code cannot be stretched to hold that there is an independent right to assail the findings recorded by the learned Sessions Judge, apart from right to prefer an appeal against the order of conviction and sentence.
27. The matter can be looked at from a slightly different
perspective. If we accept the submission on behalf of the petitioner that in every matter, where the accused is held guilty of a particular offence, he has a right to prefer an appeal against the said finding of holding him guilty, then there is a clear and present risk of destroying the integrity of trial. It would entail a two stage consideration by the appellate Court. First, after the accused is held guilty of the offence. Second, consequent to imposition of sentence on the accused. Such proposition cannot be countenanced, especially in the absence of a statutory prescription.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3214 OF 2021
Pankaj Arjunbhai Koli Vs The State of Maharashtra
CORAM : S. S. SHINDE &
N. J. JAMADAR, JJ.
DATE : 17th SEPTEMBER, 2021.
Print Page