An appellate court must assess evidence critically and cannot rely solely on uncorroborated testimonies when considering suspension of a sentence, especially in murder cases.

ORDER :

P. M. RAVAL, J.

1. Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent State.

2. The present application is preferred by original accused No.9 – Chandrakant Meghajibhai Daki under Section 430 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 for suspension of sentence awarded to him vide judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 28.2.2025 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, City Sessions Court No.16, Ahmedabad City in Sessions Case No.185 of 2009.

3. The facts of the case in nutshell are as follows:

3.1. On 15th June, 2006 deceased Pankajbhai Trivedi was assaulted by four unknown assailants around 8.30 p.m., near Ellisbridge Gymkhana in the city of Ahmedabad. He received fatal injuries and the injuries were caused with baseball bat and other weapons. He died instantaneously. The FIR was lodged by one Ramesh Vishvakarma on the same night at about 11.15 p.m. The police commenced investigation and it revealed that the deceased had criticized certain activities of the leaders of Swadhyay Parivar headed by late Pandurang Athavle Shastri and one Dhanshri Talvalkar, popularly known as Jayshri Didi. The criticizm was made even during the lifetime of Athavleji. Hence, large number of followers of Athavleji had expressed their strong resentment against the deceased and his group. As a result of this, numerous complaints were also filed against the deceased in different criminal Courts for the alleged defamatory publications made by him. The deceased was arrested, but later on released on bail. That was sometime in September/October 2005. It also appears from the record that the criminal proceedings in respect of one publication are still alive; whereas criminal complaints which were filed against another alleged defamatory publication has been quashed. It also transpires from the investigation material that certain people hatched conspiracy to commit murder of the deceased and the assault on 15th night was the result of such conspiracy.

3.2 After completion of trial, the present applicant – original accused No.9 along with other accused were convicted. Hence, the present application for suspension of sentence.

4. Learned senior advocate Mr.N.D.Nanavati assisted by learned advocate Mr.Rahul Dholakia appearing for the applicant has mainly contended as follows :

(a) That on 14.6.2006, present accused No.9 was asked by accused No.4 – Bhupatsinh Narubha Jadeja to purchase base-ball bat pursuant to which the present accused along with accused No.10 – Jasubha Dolubha Jadeja went to purchase base-ball bat. Further, on 15.6.2006 accused No.4 – Bhupatsinh Narubha Jadeja, accused No.1 – Chandrasinh Manubha Jadeja, accused No.5 – Mansinh Arjan Vadher, accused No.10 – Jasubha Dolubha Jadeja and the present accused travelled from Rajasthan to Ahmedabad in Tata Sumo car bearing registration No.GJ 1 AR 6457 belonging to and driven by Aniruddhsinh Jadeja. At the same time, accused No.2 – Hiteshsinh Rameshsinh Chudasama, accused No.3 – Dakshesh Hashmukhlal Shah aided by Chirag Thakkar, Kaushal Amin and Manish Patel conducted reconnaissance on Pankajbhai’s whereabouts (deceased) and after gathering location of the deceased, accused No.1 – Chandrasinh Manubha Jadeja, accused No.4 – Bhupatsinh Narubha Jadeja, accused No.5 – Mansinh Arjan Vadher and the present accused came to Ellisbridge Gymkhana in Maruti Van bearing registration No.GJ 1 HK 1564 belonging to Dharamsinh. It is further the case of the prosecution that accused No.5 – Mansinh Arjan Vadher armed with pipe and accused No.4 – Bhupatsinh Narubha Jadeja armed with base-ball assaulted the deceased culminating in his demise.

(b) It is further contended that it is t