Suspension of sentence during appeal is warranted when prosecution evidence is substantially unsupported, indicating potential for acquittal.

ORDER :

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

2. So far as Criminal Misc. Application No.1 of 2025 in Criminal Appeal No.868 of 2025 is concerned, the same is preferred by original accused No.1 – Chandrasinh Manubhai Jadeja, so far as Criminal Misc. Application No.3 of 2025 in Criminal Appeal No.760 of 2025 is concerned, the same is preferred by original accused No.5 – Mansinh Arajan Vadher and so far as Criminal Misc. Application No.4 of 2025 in Criminal Appeal No.760 of 2025 is concerned, the same is preferred by original accused No.4 – Bhupatsinh Narubha Jadeja under Section 430 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 for suspension of sentence awarded to them 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 applicants – original accused along with other accused were convicted. Hence, the present application for suspension of sentence.

4. Learned advocate Mr.H.R.Prajapati, learned senior advocate Mr.Devang Vyas and learned senior advocate Mr.N.D.Nanavati assisted by learned advocate Mr.Rahul Dholakia appearing for the applicants has mainly contended as follows :

(a) That present accused along with accused No.9 – Chandrakant Daki, accused No.4 – Bhupatsinh Narubha Jadeja and accused No.5 - Mansinh Arjan Vadher stayed at Roshni Guest House from 11.6.2006 to 13.6.2006. However, no evidence worth the name is coming on record that the applicants with other accused had stayed at Roshni Guest House.

(b) That it is the case of the prosecution that PW 10 – Jitendrabhai Ishwarbhai Patel has referred the accused to Roshni Guest House. However, this witness has not supported the case of the prosecution.

(c) PW 11 – Devendrabhai Dave – owner of the Roshni Guest House has also not supported the case of the prosecution and thus, test identification parade conducted at the behest of PW 11 pales into insignificance, more particularly,