ZEBAPARVIN MOHMEDJUNED Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this application under section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant ? convict seeks suspension of the execution of the sentence awarded by the learned City Sessions Judge, Court No.16, Ahmedabad, vide judgment and order dated 30.01.2019 passed in Sessions Case No.320 of 2017 and seeks to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the appeal.

(2.) Mr. S.R. Bhoharia, learned advocate for the applicant, invited the attention of the court to the charge framed by the trial court to submit that the charge against the accused is that previously, the accused had borrowed money from the deceased Mohammad Firoz Mohammadshafi and that the deceased, time and again, used to come to their house for recovery. Therefore, the accused hatched a criminal conspiracy to murder the deceased and on 27.05.2016, in the afternoon at about 13:45 hours, the accused No.3 called the deceased to the third floor of Alfara Flats and upon the deceased coming to the third floor of Alfara Flats, approximately before 15:00 hours, the accused No.1 and 3 accosted the deceased and asked him as to why he had come to recover money and why he was teasing Zeba Parveen, the appellant herein. After saying so, accused No.1 and 3 caught hold of deceased Mohammad Firoz Mohammadshafi and the accused No.2, taking advantage of the deceased being handicapped, inflicted blows with a sharp knife that he had with him, on different parts of the body of the deceased, which were fatal and caused his death and violated the notification issued by the Police Commissioner, Ahmedabad and thereby, committed the offence by abetting each other. The accused are, accordingly, charged for the offences punishable under sections 302 , 12OB and 114 of the Indian Penal Code and section 135(1) of the Gujarat Police Act.

(3.) Vehemently opposing the application, Ms. C.M. Shah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the prosecution, through the testimonies of witnesses, has duly established the chain of circumstances to prove the guilt of the accused. It was submitted that a knife was recovered from the accused No.2, which bore the blood stains of the blood group of the deceased and the prosecution, through the testimony of PW 9 Sarfarazalam Janealam Sheikh, has proved that it was the applicant who had purchased the knife from his shop prior to the incident. It was submitted that the said witness, who is a shopkeeper, has identified the knife as well as the applicant. It was submitted that the said witness, being an independent witness, would have no reason to falsely implicate the accused.