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

1 of 2025 In R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 189 of 2025 ==========================================================

RESHMABHAI BAJUBHAI RATHWA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ==========================================================

Appearance:

JAYDEEP H SINDHI(9585) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 MR RONAK RAVAL, APP for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI Date : 05/03/2026

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.Jaydeep Sindhi, learned advocate and Mr.Ronak Raval, learned APP for the respective parties.

3. By way of this application under Section 430 of Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, applicant – Reshmabhai Bajubhai Rathwa, seeks suspension of sentence awarded to him by the Sessions Court concerned for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. The present appeal and the application for suspension of sentence arise from the judgment dated 13.09.2024 and order of sentence passed in Sessions Case No.10 of 2021, whereby, the applicant herein was convicted and sentenced as under:

5. Facts and circumstances giving rise to file present application are that deceased was friend of one Arvind Malsinghbhai and Arvind Malsinghbhai had an affair with the daughter of the accused, as a result, in order to take revenge, the applicant accused killed him by causing head injuries with the weapon shovel. The incident of murder being occurred on 13.06.2020 and on the basis of the FIR and chargesheet, the accused was put on trial and at the end of trial, he came to be convicted and sentenced as mentioned above.

6. Learned advocate Mr.Jaydeep Sindhi, appearing on behalf of the applicant while praying for suspension of sentence contended that, the incarceration period is 5 years and 7 months and as on date, the age of the accused is 67 years old and the appeal challenging the conviction may not likely to be listed for final hearing in near future and therefore, having regard to the nature of injury and period of incarceration, the prayer may be considered.

7. On the other hand, Mr.Ronak Raval, 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 affecting society at large 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. It is no doubt true that the age of the applicant as on date is 66 years old and the incarceration period is 5 years and 7 months. The medical evidence shows that there was single injury found in the head. In such circumstances, prima facie we are of the view that the case at the most be one of culpable homicide not amount to murder. Thus, therefore, having regard to the age of the applicant and the manner in which, the incident had occurred, along with the nature of injury, we are persuaded to exercise our discretion in favour of the applicant convict for the purpose of suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

10. Accordingly, present application is allowed. Rule is made absolute to aforesaid extent. The sentence of the applicant awarded vide judgment dated 13.09.2024 by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Chhotaudepur in Sessions Case No.10 of

2021 is suspended during the pendency of the Criminal Appeal and the applicant shall be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- wi