R/CR.A/1849/2019 IA ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR SUSPENSION OF
SENTENCE) NO. 1 of 2019
In R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1849 of 2019
DAYARAM NARSHIBHAI PARMAR
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
Appearance:
MR ASHISH M DAGLI for the PETITIONER(s) No.
MS SHRUTI PATHAK, APP for the RESPONDENT(s) No.
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA
Date : 25/10/2019
IA ORDER
1. Learned advocate Mr. Ashish Dagli does not press this
application qua applicant no.1 at this stage. Permission as
prayed for is granted. Application stands dismissed as not
pressed qua applicant no.1.
2. This application under Section 389 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 is preferred praying for suspension
of sentence imposed by learned 2nd Additional District
Sessions Judge, Morbi vide order dated 4th September, 2019
passed in Sessions Case No. 37 of 2017 and to release them
on bail during the pendency of captioned Criminal Appeal.
3. Learned advocate for the applicants submitted that the
Page 1 of 4
Downloaded on : Sat Oct 26 04:07:48 IST 2019
R/CR.A/1849/2019 IA ORDER
applicants are convicted for offence punishable under Sectionsection
306 of the Indian Penal Code and are ordered to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for eight years and fine of Rs.5000/-
was imposed, and in default of payment of fine, the applicants
have to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year.
4. So far as applicants nos.2 and 3 are concerned, who are
the accused of offence under Section 306 of the Indian Penal
Code, are father-in-law and mother-in-law respectively.
Learned advocate for the applicants submitted that
considering the evidence on record, ingredient of Section 306
and Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code are not attracted
prima facie. He referred to the impugned judgment and order
and pointed out from the evidence of Investigating Officer at
Exh.70 that statement of twelve different persons residing in
neighborhood residence of the applicants were recorded and
as per the said statements, it was revealed that the deceased
committed suicide along with two daughters on the ground
that cradle was not given to the younger daughter, where as
applicants gave cradle to their daughter, who has given birth
to male child. It was further submitted that there was no
instigation on part of the applicants nos.2 and 3 so as to
commit offence of abetment. He further submitted that
during the investigation when the offence was registered
Page 2 of 4
Downloaded on : Sat Oct 26 04:07:48 IST 2019
R/CR.A/1849/2019 IA ORDER
against the deceased, aforesaid incident of not giving cradle
to the daughter of the deceased was also revealed from the
station diary. He further submitted that the allegations made
with regard to the offence under Section 498A, they are
general in nature. He therefore, prayed for suspension of
sentence qua the applicants nos.2 and 3.
5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor,
Ms. Shruti Pathak for the respondents submitted that the
conduct of the applicants is required to be taken into
consideration as the applicants did not try to save the
deceased at the time of incident as recorded in the impugned
judgment and order. She further submitted that it was the
duty of the applicant no.2 to see that no such untoward
incident as it happened, would have taken place if he had
taken care. She also submitted that the conduct of the
applicants nos.2 and 3 is nothing but abetment for the
deceased to commit suicide along with two minor daughters
where one of the daughter was of 13 days old. It is further
submitted that looking to the facts of the case no indulgence
should be shown for granting bail to the applicants nos.2 and
3 in any circumstance, during the pendency of the appeal.
6. Having heard the learned advocates for the respective
Page 3 of 4
Downloaded on : Sat Oct 26 04:07:48 IST 2019
R/CR.A/1849/2019 IA ORDER
parties and taking into consideration the evidence on record
and considering the fact that the sentence imposed upon the
applicants is of eight years, I am of the opinion that the
present application requires consideration qua applicants
nos.2 and 3 and prayer in terms of bail is required to be
allowed. Sentence imposed by the judgment and order dated
04.09.2019 passed in Sessions Case No.37 of 2017 is hereby
suspended pending hearing and final disposal of Criminal
Appeal. The applicants nos.2 and 3 shall be released on bail
by executing fresh bond of Rs. 10,000/- each ( Rupees Ten
Thousand only) and upon furnishing one surety of like amount
to the satisfaction of the trial Court and on further condition
that they shall proceed with the Criminal Appeal as and when
it may be listed for hearing and they shall surrender their
passport, if having, before the trial Court and shall not leave
India without prior permission of this Court.
7. Criminal Misc. Application is allowed qua applicants
nos.2 and 3. Rule made absolute to aforesaid extent qua
applicants nos. 2 and 3.
8. Direct service is permitted today.
(BHARGAV D. KARIA, J)
NEHA
Page 4 of 4
Downloaded on : Sat Oct 26 04:07:48 IST 2019