Gujarat Court Sentences 96-Year-Old to One-Year Imprisonment for Bank Fraud Committed 35 Years Ago

In an unprecedented decision, a Gujarat court has sentenced a 96-year-old man, bedridden and suffering from multiple ailments, to one year in prison for a bank fraud case dating back 35 years. The convict, Anil Gosalia, a resident of Mumbai, was physically unable to attend the court proceedings due to his health condition.

Despite Gosalia’s frail health, the Special CBI Justice C.G. Mehta issued a conviction warrant against him. Gosalia’s lawyer, R.G. Ahuja, informed the court about his client’s health and requested leniency on these grounds. Considering Gosalia’s condition, the court showed mercy and sentenced him to one year in jail, acknowledging his inability to perform daily activities independently.

READ ALSO  हाई कोर्ट ने सामूहिक बलात्कार मामले में 5 लोगों की जेल की सजा को संशोधित किया, आजीवन कारावास की सजा सुनाई

However, Justice Mehta rejected the plea for probation made by Gosalia’s lawyer, stating, “Until the court imposes appropriate punishment for such socio-economic offenses, people lose faith in the judicial system and the purpose of law. Misplaced sympathy or undue leniency would send a wrong message to society.” In addition to Gosalia, his 71-year-old son Dilip and 58-year-old nephew Vimal were found guilty of bank fraud and sentenced to five years in prison.

Video thumbnail

Also Read

READ ALSO  Supreme Court Criticises Allahabad HC Order Issuing Non-Bailable Warrant Against NOIDA CEO

While all the accused were present in court, except for Gosalia, leading to their immediate custody, Gosalia’s lawyer requested that he be allowed to remain on bail instead of being sent to jail, which the court approved, sparing him immediate imprisonment. The Gosalia family was accused of conspiring with officials of the State Bank of Saurashtra in 1989 through their Bhavnagar-based firm, Gosalia International, to increase the letter of credit limit. The fraud came to light in 1995, followed by a CBI investigation, and the trial lasted 26 years.

READ ALSO  Supreme Court Clubs Multiple FIRs Against an Accused, Says Multiplicity of Proceedings is Not in Larger Public Interest
Ad 20- WhatsApp Banner

Law Trend
Law Trendhttps://lawtrend.in/
Legal News Website Providing Latest Judgments of Supreme Court and High Court

Related Articles

Latest Articles