NARENDRASINH RAMDEVSINH RAJPUT Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present application has been filed by the applicant, appellant-original accused for suspension of the sentence under sec. 389 of Cr.P.C.

(2.) The applicant-appellant is convicted in Sessions Case No. 104/2009 by the learned Sessions Judge, Kheda at Nadiad, vide judgment and order dated 25.5.2010 recording the conviction of the accused for the offence under sec. 307 r/w sec. 34 of IPC and imposing sentence of R.I. for 5 years and fine of Rs. 20,000/-, in default R.I. for 1 year.

(3.) Learned advocate Mr. Bhatt for the applicant referred to the R&P which has been called for and pointedly referred to the testimony of the witnesses at Exh. 13, 15 and 17 and has tried to submit that it is a case of accident and the conviction could not have been recorded under sec. 307 of IPC. He has also referred to the evidence and submitted that there are discrepancies in the testimony of the witnesses and emphasised that one witness has said that it was Kheda Bridge and other witness has stated it to be Sabarmati bridge and therefore the place of incident is not clearly stated. Similarly, he submitted that the direction of the car is also not properly stated by the witnesses. He therefore submitted that hearing of the appeal may take some time and the applicant is a driver and considering his family circumstances, the present application may be allowed.