The court established criteria for suspending sentences in serious offences, necessitating careful assessment of individual roles and evidence.

ORDER :

P. M. RAVAL, J.

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

2. The applicant is before this Court against the conviction handed down upon him in Sessions Case No.264 of 2015 whereby learned 6^th Additional Sessions Judge, Banaskantha at Deodar vide judgment and order dated 30.6.2025 convicted the applicant for the offences punishable under sections 302, 307, 326, 324, 323 read with sections 143, 147, 148 and 149 of Indian Penal Code .

3. By way of the impugned judgment and order, learned trial Judge has convicted the applicant as follows :

 All the sentences were ordered to be run concurrently and set off was also granted by learned trial Judge under section 428 of CrPC.

4. Learned advocate Mr.Virat Popat for the applicant would submit that the complainant side is also convicted for the offences punishable under section 302 read with section 149 of IPC. That charge at Exh.2 dated 27.9.2007 read with complaint at Exh.413 dated 25.9.2002 would clearly point out that very vague charge is framed against the accused persons. That no specific role has been attributed to specific accused persons and that generalized and wholesome charge has been framed and despite this fact, learned trial Judge without considering individual role has convicted those accused who have not been attributed with any overt act. That specific role attributed of inflicting injury with scythe is attributed to Gagaji Vihaji Thakor, Dashrathji Raichand Thakor and Raichand Vihaji Thakor on head of deceased Valabhai Jalabhai Patel, whereas other co-accused persons have been attributed with either some grievous or simple injury, however, not attributed to the deceased, but other witnesses. Learned advocate for the applicant also vehemently argued that despite learned trial Judge concluded that the present accused person along with other accused have formed unlawful assembly, however, learned trial Court without considering independent role has handed down conviction under section 302 of IPC for life imprisonment by invoking provisions of section 149 of IPC. That in all there are 28 accused persons who are convicted for the offence under section 302 read with section 149 of IPC of which accused Nos.7 and 21 in Sessions Case No.265 of 2015 have expired and their cases have been abated and thus all other 26 persons are in jail despite of the fact that specific role having been attributed to some of them having injured some of the witnesses while no role is attributed to the present accused. Under the circumstances, it is argued to allow the present application.

5. Mr.L.B.Dabhi, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has supported the impugned judgment and order of conviction as passed by the trial Court and has vehemently opposed the present application. It is submitted that merely because the complainant side in the present have also been convicted for the offence under section 302 read with section 149 of IPC and that in the present case also, learned trial Judge has believed the offence attracting the provisions of section 149 of IPC, it cannot be said that learned trial Court has committed an error in convicting the applicants, more particularly, when detailed reasoned judgment has been delivered by learned trial Judge by apprecia