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 08-11-2024 by learned Sessions Judge, Jamnagar (hereinafter referred to as the learned Trial Court) in Sessions Case No. 201 of 2011, whereby, the applicant was convicted for the offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 325 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 135 (1) of the Gujarat Police Act, and sentenced to simple imprisonment for six (06) months for the offence under Section 143 of IPC, simple imprisonment for six (06) months for the offence under Section 147 of IPC, simple imprisonment for one (01) year for the offence under Section 148 of IPC, rigorous imprisonment for seven (07) years and fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default simple imprisonment for one (01) year for the offence under Section 307 read with Section 149 of the IPC, rigorous imprisonment for one (01) year and fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default simple imprisonment for one (01) month for the offence under Section 323 read with Section 149 of the IPC , rigorous imprisonment for two (02) years and fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default simple imprisonment for one (01) month for the offence under Section 325 read with Section 149 of the IPC, rigorous imprisonment for two (02) years for the offence under Section 504 read with Section 149 of the IPC and rigorous imprisonment for six (06) months for the offence under Section 135(1) of the GP Act. All sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

3] Heard learned advocate Mr. Ashish Dagli for the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms. C.M.Shah for the respondent No. 1 – State.

4] Learned advocate Mr. Ashish Dagli for the applicant submits that the applicant has a good case on merits and there are chances of acquittal of the applicant. The applicant has already undergone incarceration of approximately 1½ years. Earlier, the applicant had approached this Hon’ble Court by filing an application for suspension of sentence being Criminal Misc. Application No. 1 of 2024 in Criminal Appeal No.2790 of 2024, which came to be withdrawn qua the present applicant with liberty to file a fresh application after one year. It is further submitted that though the prosecution alleges that the present applicant was holding a knife and inflicted a blow on the left side of the stomach of the injured, similar allegations are also made against other co-accused who were allegedly armed with deadly weapons, the sentence have been suspended by the Co-ordiante bench of this Court. The evidence on record does not clearly distinguish the specific role of the applicant from that of the other accused persons, and the prosecution case suffers from material contradictions, absence of reliable corroboration, and lack of recovery supporting the alleged use of weapon. Learned advocate further submits that the prosecution examined Medical Officer at Exh.27, who has admitted in the cross-examination that injured Aniruddhsinh was discharged at the request of relatives and no history was given by the injured though he was conscious, thereby creating a doubt regarding the version of the prosecution and entitling the applicant to consideration for suspension of sentence. Learned advocate submits that the present appeal is filed within time period of appeal and the appeal is not likely to be heard in 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