IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUSPENSION OF SENTENCE) NO.

1 of 2025 In R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1300 of 2025 ==========================================================

IMARAN GULMAHAMMADBHAI JAKHARA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ==========================================================

Appearance:

RAFIK LOKHANDWALA(5590) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 MR VINAY VISHEN, APP for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. M. RAVAL Date : 14/10/2025

IA ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA)

1. Rule. Learned APP waives service of Rule on behalf of respondent-State. By consent, Rule is fixed forthwith.

2. We have heard Mr. Rafik Lokhandwala, learned advocate for the applicant and Mr. Vinay Vishen, learned APP for the respondent-State.

3. By way of this application under Section 430(1) of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, applicant seeks suspension of sentence awarded to him by the Sessions Court concerned for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 307 and 337 read with Section 115 of IPC.

4. The present appeal and the application for suspension of sentence arise from the judgment dated 24.04.2025 and order of sentence passed in Sessions Case No.35 of 2019, whereby, the applicant herein was convicted and sentenced as under:

(i) Section 302 r/w. Section 115 of IPC: R.I. for Life and fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default thereof, further imprisonment for 6 months;

(ii) Section 307 r/w. Section 115 of IPC: R.I. for 10 years and fine of Rs.7,500/- and in default thereof, further imprisonment for 6 months;

(ii) Section 337 r/w. Section 115 of IPC: S.I. for 03 months and fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default thereof, further imprisonment for 15 days;

5. Facts and circumstances giving rise to file present application are that, two accused persons were tried and prosecuted for the offence of murder. On 23.06.2019, taking revenge of earlier dispute, the accused Javed @ Gullo Gul Mohd. Zakhra, stabbed the deceased Firoz @ Premjibhai with the knife, as a result, he succumbed to his injuries. So far role attributed to present applicant – A2 - Imran Zakhra is concerned, by telephonic conversation he instigated and instructed A1 to kill the deceased Firozbhai. The investigating agency arrested both the accused and upon filing the chargesheet, the accused were put on trial and at the end, the court found both the accused guilty of the offence murder and sentenced them to undergo life imprisonment.

6. Mr. Lokhandwala, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant while praying for suspension of sentence contended that, the trial Court is not justified in convicting the applicant accused A2 for the offence of murder, as there is absolutely no evidence is found on record against him. The call conversation relied by the trial Court does not indicative of the fact that the applicant accused in clear terms instigated and directed the A1 to kill the deceased and therefore, the findings recorded for conviction by the trial Court are palpably wrong and unsustainable in eye of law. In such circumstances, it is stated that there are all chances of succeeding in appeal and the conviction appeal may not likely to be heard in near future and in that view of the matter, the prayer may be considered.

7. On the other hand, Mr. Vishen, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has supported the impugned judgment and order of conviction as passed by the trial Court and contended that, the offence proved is serious one and in absence of any exceptional circumstances, the prayer may not be allowed.

8. Issue arises as to whether the applicant has made out a case for suspension of sentence?

9. We have carefully examined the case records and considered the submissions made at the bar. We take notice of the fact that, the applicant accused A2 was not present at the place nor in any manner he participated along with the accused A