##PAGE1##

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.A/1535/2025 IA ORDER DATED: 23/03/2026

0.7340114622892266

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUSPENSION OF

SENTENCE) NO. 2 of 2026 In R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1535 of 2025 ==========================================================

PATEL BABUBHAI JOITARAM DWARKADAS Versus STATE OF GUJARAT

==========================================================

Appearance:

MS TEJAL A VASHI with MR. MAHINKHAN PATHAN for the APPLICANT MR.ADITYA JADEJA, APP for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE S.V. PINTO Date : 23/03/2026

IA ORDER

1] RULE. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service

of rule on behalf of the respondent No. 1 – State.

2] This application is filed by the applicant for suspension of sentence in connection with the conviction recorded vide judgment and order dated 29-05-2025 by the learned Sessions Judge, Patan in Sessions Case No. 15 of 2019, whereby, the applicant was convicted for the offences under Sections 307 of the IPC and 25(1) (a) (b) and 30 of the Indian Arms Act and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for five (05) years and fine of Rs.30,000/- and in default simple imprisonment for six (06) months for the offence under Section 307 of the IPC, rigorous imprisonment for five (05) years and fine of Rs.20,000/- and in default simple

Page 1 of 5 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Mon Mar 23 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 30 04:55:41 IST 2026

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.A/1535/2025 IA ORDER DATED: 23/03/2026

0.7340114622892266

imprisonment for three months (03) months for the offence under Sections 25 (1)(a) (b) and 30 of the Arms Act. Both the sentences

were ordered to run concurrently.

3] Heard learned advocate Ms. Tejal Vashi with learned advocate Mr. Mahinkhan Pathan for the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Mr. Aditya Jadeja for the respondent

No. 1 – State.

4] Learned advocate Ms. Tejal Vashi for the applicant submits that earlier the applicant has preferred the application for suspension of sentence, which came to be withdrawn vide order dated 20-06-2025. It is respectfully submitted that out of other co- accused arraigned in the present case, the present applicant alone has been convicted, whereas the remaining co-accused, who were allegedly armed with pipes, have been acquitted by the learned Trial Court on the very same set of evidence. The prosecution case itself rests upon a sole eye-witness who has not supported the prosecution version, thereby substantially weakening the substratum of the case at this prima facie stage. It is further submitted that the injuries sustained by the victim are simple in nature and do not reflect any grave or life-threatening assault. The learned advocate submits that the present appeal is filed within

Page 2 of 5 Uploaded by VISHAL MISHRA(HC01088) on Mon Mar 23 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Mar 30 04:55:41 IST 2026

NEUTRAL CITATION

R/CR.A/1535/2025 IA ORDER DATED: 23/03/2026

0.7340114622892266

time period of appeal The sentence awarded to the applicant is of short duration and the appeal is unlikely to be heard finally in the near future and hearing of the same would take some long time and hence, no purpose would be served by keeping the applicant in jail for indefinite period with hardened criminals. The applicant has a good case on merits and hence, the order of the sentence may be suspended and the applicant may be released on regular bail on

appropriate terms and condition.

5] Learned APP for the State has objected to the present application to grant suspension of sentence and has submitted that the order of sentence is just and proper and no interference is required in the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge and

hence, present application may be rejected.

6] On perusal of the impugned judgment and order of conviction and the paper book produced on record by the learned advocate for the applicant, it is on record that the ot