1. Rule. Ms.Chetna Shah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of Rule for respondent No.1-State of Gujarat. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and with the consent of the learned counsel for the respective parties, the application is being heard and finally decided, today.
2. The applicants are original accused Nos.1 to 3, 5 to 8 and 13 of S.C.No.148/2006, whereas applicant No.9 is the original accused of S.C.No.140/2010. The applicants have been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 326, 324, 323, 337, 504, 506(2) and 188 of the Indian Penal Code and Section-135 of the Bombay Police Act, vide judgment and order dated 27.06.2012 of the Sessions Court, Mehsana (Camp at Visnagar). The applicants have filed the present application under Section-389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for suspension of sentence during the pendency and final disposal of the appeal.
3. Heard Mr.Pratik B. Barot, learned advocate for the applicants and Ms.Chetna Shah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1-State of Gujarat.
4. It is submitted by Mr.Barot that the total period of sentence imposed upon the applicants is of one year. There is no likelihood that the appeal filed by the applicants would be heard and disposed of, within a period of one year. It is further submitted that the applicants have remained on bail throughout the trial and have not misused the liberty granted to them in any manner, therefore, in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Bhagwan Rama Shinde Gosai Vs. State of Gujarat reported in AIR 1999 SC 1859 and Angana and another Vs. State of Rajasthan reported in 2009 (2) GLH 37, the prayers made in the application may be granted.
5. Ms.Chetna Shah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has opposed the grant of the prayers made in the application, but has not come out with any material to show that the applicants have misused their liberty, while on bail during trial.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and in view of the aspect that the total period of sentence imposed upon them is of one year and, as there is no material to show that the applicants have misused the liberty granted to them while they were on bail during trial, the application deserves to be considered. Further, there does not appear to be any likelihood that the appeal would be heard and disposed of within a short period of time, therefore, this Court considers it to be a fit case in which to exercise discretion in favour of the applicants.
7. It has been submitted by the learned advocate for the applicants that the fine imposed by the Sessions Court has been paid by the applicants. The Trial Court has suspended the sentence of the applicants for a period of thirty days, which is expiring today, therefore, the applicants are presently on bail.
8. For the aforestated reasons, the application is allowed. The sentence imposed on the applicants vide judgment and order dated 27.06.2012 passed by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Mehsana, Camp at Visnagar, in Sessions Case No.148/2006 and 140/2010, shall remain suspended during the pendency of the appeal. The applicants are ordered to be released on the same bail as granted by the Trial Court, with fresh bail bonds.
9. Rule is made absolute.
Direct Service of this order is permitted.
Gaurav+ (Smt. Abhilasha Kumari, J.)