JUDGMENT K.S. Jhaveri, J. 1. All these appeals arise from the judgment and order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Anand and therefore they are being disposed of by the present common judgment. 2. The appellants have challenged their conviction in Sessions Cases No. 64 of 2009 whereby the appellants came to be convicted vide judgment and order dated 09.09.2011 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Anand. By the same impugned judgment and order the appellants came to be convicted. The learned Additional Sessions Judge vide impugned judgment and order directed the appellants to suffer imprisonment as under: Section Particulars of sentence 302 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code R.I. For life 392 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code R.I. for 7 years 397 e/w 34 of Indian penal code R.I. for 7 years 3. The brief facts of the case are as under: 3.1 That on 23.02.2003 at 8.30 in the morning, all the appellants were travelling in the car of the Jigneshbhai Natvarsinh Zala aged about 24 years as passengers bearing No. G.J. 23 M-2700 of Tavera make. Jigneshbhai Natwarsinh zala was travelling on national highway No. 7 and he was coming from Bombay and was going towards Anand. At that time, all the accused took lift in the Car and with their connivance the accused No. 1 has given knife blow. They have first tied the legs-hands and mouth of driver Jigneshbhai Natvarsinh Zala and inflicted blows upon him with a sharp aged weapon. The accused all together thrown away the body of Jitendrasinh Natwarsinh Zala on the sub way near the Canal at Moger Village to destroy the evidence. The complainant is the chaukidar who in turn informed the police of Vasad camp at Moger. In pursuance of this complaint, FIR being CR No. I - 13 of 2009 came to be registered with Vasad Police Station. 3.2 The investigation was taken up and after usual investigation, charge sheet came to be filed against the appellants. The offences committed by the appellants were exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions. Therefore, the learned Magistrate committed the case to the Sessions Court at Anand under Section 209 of the Code. Upon committal, the case came to be registered as Sessions Case No. 64 of 2009 in Sessions Court, Anand Charge came to be framed against the appellants. They pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Therefore, the learned Magistrate committed the case to the Sessions Court at Anand under Section 209 of the Code. Upon committal, the case came to be registered as Sessions Case No. 64 of 2009 in Sessions Court, Anand Charge came to be framed against the appellants. They pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 3.3 During the trial, the prosecution had examined following witnesses; Witness No. Name Exh. 1. Dr. Ambalal Hirabhai Patel 18 2. Natwarbhai Kalyansinh Mahida Exh.24 3. Jitendrasinh Sursinh Solanki 27 4. Dhirubhai Bachibhai Malek Exh.28 5. Vijaysinh Mohansinh Vaghela 31 6. Natwarsinh Laxmansinh Zala 34 7. Kanaksinh Dolatsinh Raolji 36 8. Sureshbhai Hathibhai Patel 38 9. Ramabhai Pujabhai Patel 38 10. Chandubhai Shanabhai Gohel 49 11. Dhirenkumar Nathalal 52 12. Sikandarsha Akbarsha Diwan 55 13. Jagdishbhai Chhaganbhai Parmar 58 14. Kalpeshbhai Kanaksinh 62 15. Lalabhai Bhikhabhai 61 16. Prakashbhai Nanalala Kasundra 65 17. Ramanbhai Babubhai Parmar 66 18. Rahukumar Rameshbhai Patel 6 19. Dipesh Rajubhai Patel 19 20. Jayantibhai Patel 72 21. Mitesh Jayantibhai Patel 72 22. Babaubhai Mithabhai Patel 79 23. Jitubhai Jayantibhai Shah 83 24. Dr. Rakesh Umakant Avasthi 86 25. Shaktisinh Vikramsinh Ravalji 98 26. Sandipsinh Mahendrasinh Ravalji Exh.99 27. Sarojben Natwarsinh Zala Exh.100 28. Vijaysinh Dhirubha Zala Exh.104 29. Prabladsinh Narsinh Rajavat 114 30. Sharifmiya Basirmiya Malek 120 31. Benedict Nicolas Meckwan 123 32. Hamidaben Mansinh Rathod 126 33. Vishwanath 131 Mahendrasinh Tomar 34. Somabhai Ditabhai Patel 134 35. Bhavik Arvindbhai Joshi 156 3.4 The prosecution also relied on following documentary evidence Sr. No. Description Exh. 1. Yadi send for P.M. 19 2. Yadi to write name of the deceased in the P.M. 20 3. P.M. Note 21 4. Yadi sent to medical officer regarding blood sample 22, 23 5. Original complaint 25 6. Inquest Panchnama 29 7. Panch Slip of Article 1 30 8. Panchnama of place of incident 32 9. Panch slips of Article No.3 Exh.33 10. Panchnama of identification of the dead body of the deceased 37 11. Panchnama of clothes of the deceased 39 12. Panchslips of Muddamal Article No.8 to 10 40 13. Panchslips of Muddamal Article No.9 41 14. Panchnama of seizure of Tavera Car and clothes having blood stains 45 15. Panchnama of physical condition of the accused Madansinh Sureshsinh 46 16. Panchnama of physical condition of the accused Kaliprasad Gurja 47 17. Panchnama of physical condition of the accused 53 18. Panchslips of Muddamal Article No.8 to 10 40 13. Panchslips of Muddamal Article No.9 41 14. Panchnama of seizure of Tavera Car and clothes having blood stains 45 15. Panchnama of physical condition of the accused Madansinh Sureshsinh 46 16. Panchnama of physical condition of the accused Kaliprasad Gurja 47 17. Panchnama of physical condition of the accused 53 18. Panchslips of Muddamal Articles Nos.24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 54 19. Panchnama of the place shown by the accused 56 20. Panchnama of the place shown by the accused Arvind Devendrasihn Jadav 57 21. Panchnama of place from where knife was discovered and show by accused no.1 59 22. Papers of Care bearing No.GJ-23-2700 68 23. Panchnama of identification of mobile phone of the deceased 70 24. Spot Analysis Report presented by the FSL 77 25. Report of FSL for Taveral Car 78 26. Yadi for identification parade 80 27. Yadi for presence of in identification parade 81 28. Panchnama of identification parade 82 29. Medicla yadi 87 30. Medical yadi of accused Sonu Kalikaprasad 88 31. Medical Yadi of the accused Madansinh Sureshsinh 89 32. Medical Yadi to Arvindsinh Devendrasinh 90 33. Medical certificate of accused no.1 91 34. Medical certificate of accused no.3 92 35. Medical certificate of accused no.4 93 36. Medical certificate of accused no.2 37. Yadi sent for taking blood sample of the accused 95 38. Papers of procedure done in Ajmer Vijaynagar Police Station 39. Report of Muddamal Article 116 40. Coy of rojnama register 117 41. Yadi of PSI Vasad 118 42. Receipt regarding receiving the dead body 121 43. Yadi sent for map 124 44. Map of place of incident 125 45. Register of telephone incoming 127 46. Inquest Panchnama 129 47. Vardhy of telephone of sarpanch 135 48. Death Form 136 49. Entry in Station Diary 137 50. Dispathc Note 138 51. FSL Receipt 139 52. FSL Letter 140 53. Letter written to PSI, Vasad 141 54. Report of physiological department 142 55. FSL Letter 143 56. FSL Report 144 57. Serological Report 148 58. Print our of Mobile Phone 146 59. Receipt of Toll Tax 149 60. Yadi for presence of the accused in T.I. 148 61. Report of Investigation Mobile Van, Kheda 149 62. Figure Report Bureau 150 63. Print out of mobile phone of the deceased 151 64. FSL Letter 143 56. FSL Report 144 57. Serological Report 148 58. Print our of Mobile Phone 146 59. Receipt of Toll Tax 149 60. Yadi for presence of the accused in T.I. 148 61. Report of Investigation Mobile Van, Kheda 149 62. Figure Report Bureau 150 63. Print out of mobile phone of the deceased 151 64. Yadi regarding details of mobile phone of the deceased from LCB Police Station 157 65. Detail of the mobile phone of the deceased 158 66. Application Form 159 67. Yadi for getting details of mobile phone No.9824651428 from LCB Police Station 160 68. Yadi for getting call details of mobile phone no.9824651428 161 69. Application form of Sanjay Udayprakash Kushwah 162 70. Letter presented by LCB Police Station for call details of mobile phone no.9825651428 163 71. Yadi for getting details of mobile Phone No.9825651428 164 72. Certificate of mobile company 165 3.5 At the end of the trial, after recording the statement of the accused under section 313 of the Cr.P.C. and hearing arguments on behalf of prosecution and the defence, the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the appellants of the charges leveled against them by the impugned judgment and order. 4. Learned advocate appearing for the appellants submitted that there is no eye witness to the incident. Learned advocate appearing for the appellants contended that the whole case is based on circumstantial evidence and prosecution has miserably failed to prove their case against the accused and the complaint shown is not proved. Learned advocate for the appellant-accused, submitted that the Court below committed serious error in convicting the appellants for the alleged offence. 5. Learned advocate appearing for the appellants further contended that medical evidence does not support the prosecution story. In view of the medical evidence more particularly the evidence of PW 1 Dr.Ambalal Hirabhai Patel who has performed the post mortem of the deceased and who is examined at Exh. 10, in the P.M. Note it is stated that only one injury was found on the dead body of the deceased and the cause of death in column No. 17 and 18 clearly establish that only one injury is found. 6. Learned advocate appearing for the appellant further contended that identification parade and other proceedings are not properly held and the accused are entitled for benefit of doubt. 7. 6. Learned advocate appearing for the appellant further contended that identification parade and other proceedings are not properly held and the accused are entitled for benefit of doubt. 7. Alternatively, it was submitted that the Court below ought not to have convicted the appellants u/s.302 IPC since the Postmortem report (Exh. 21) proves that deceased died of a single injury on the chest. It was, therefore, prayed that the conviction of the appellants may be altered to Section 304 Part-I and sentence may be reduced. 8. Ms. C.M. Shah, learned APP appearing for the State strongly supported the prosecution case. She submitted that the charge in the present case has been duly proved by the prosecution and that from the evidence of witnesses as well as documentary evidences, the presence of accused persons is fully established. She submitted that there is overwhelming evidence against all the accused persons and therefore there is no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment and order. 9. Learned APP for the respondent State has taken us to the evidence of complainant and other witnesses who has last seen together and evidence of identification parade and panchnama of recovery of mobile phone and Car and their injury they have found together by one of the witnesses. Therefore, no interference is required to be called for. 10. We have heard learned advocates for the accused-convict and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. We have gone through the judgment and order passed by the trial court. We have also perused the oral as well as documentary evidence led by the trial court and also considered the submissions made by learned Advocates for both the sides. 11. PW 15-Lalabhai Bhikhabhai is examined at Exh. 61 is the independent witness. The driver of the car Ramanbhai Babubhai is examined at Exh. 66 in his evidence he deposed that the deceased Jitendrabhai and PW 22-Mahesbhai Jayantibhai Patel had met at night at Navsari. Therefore, there is no reason to disbelieve the evidence of present witness. 12. PW 22-Maheshbhai Jayantibhai Patel is examined at Exh. 72 who has seen last the deceased and the accused at the time of incident. He has identified the accused Pavankumar, Arvindsinh and Madansinh in the identification parade. As per the evidence of Maheshbhai he deposed that he met the deceased at Navsari. Thereafter they reached at Kamrej at 11 O'clock in their individual cars. 72 who has seen last the deceased and the accused at the time of incident. He has identified the accused Pavankumar, Arvindsinh and Madansinh in the identification parade. As per the evidence of Maheshbhai he deposed that he met the deceased at Navsari. Thereafter they reached at Kamrej at 11 O'clock in their individual cars. Thereafter they stopped at Palej and till Vadodara Highway both the cars were driven simultaneously. At that time, the deceased was alone and four persons were sitting in the Tavera Car. The deceased came towards Baroda highway and Maheshbhai went towards Baroda City. They reached at Baroda around 11 to 11.30 A.M. and there would be minimum 40 minutes to reach Anand where the deceased was killed by the accused. Hence there is short time gap between the meeting of the deceased and Maheshbhai and from this evidence it can be said that the accused were in connivance with each other committed the crime. This witness also identified the three accused persons. Babubhaia Mithabhai Parmar is examined at Exh. 79 is also the independent witness. 13. The Blood stains were found on the clothes of the deceased, blood of the accused in Tavera Car and blood was found on the handkerchief by which the deceased was tied, and also on the clothes of the accused which was of the deceased. Therefore, the presence of the accused at the time of commission of offence is proved. The mobile phone of the deceased was looted by the accused and it was used by the accused since the said mobile phone was recovered from the accused. The accused had committed robbery by stealing the Tavera Car which was driven by the deceased and it was found from the possession of the accused from Rajasthan. The knife was discovered at the instance of accused No. 1. 14. The doctor Rakesh Umakant Awasthi is examined at Exh. 86 who has examined the accused and deposed that the injuries which were sustained by the accused are possible in the scuffle with each other and the injuries were possible in the vehicular accident. The injuries were normal. 15. The FSL Report and Serological report at Exh. 138 also support the case of the prosecution. 86 who has examined the accused and deposed that the injuries which were sustained by the accused are possible in the scuffle with each other and the injuries were possible in the vehicular accident. The injuries were normal. 15. The FSL Report and Serological report at Exh. 138 also support the case of the prosecution. As per the FSL report, the bloodstains are found on the clothes of the deceased, accused as well as on the Handkerchief by which the neck of the deceased was tied. Thus from this evidence, the presence of the accused persons are established at the time of offence. 16. Further, the evidence of Maheshbhai Jayantibhai is supported by the evidence of Ramanbhai Parmar. The mobile phone was stolen by the accused and it was used by the accused. Hence, the presence of the accused is established. 17. The intention of the accused is to commit the robbery of the Tavera Car driven by the deceased Jitendrabhai after killing him. The accused with prearrangement decided the place get into Tavera Car of the deceased from Kamrej, Thus all the accused had common intention to kill the deceased and thereafter committing robbery or dacoity. 18. We have gone through the medical evidence of the doctor who had conducted the post mortem of the deceased. From the post mortem report and the evidence of doctor, the cause of death mentioned in the post mortem report is that death due to Heartologic Shock due to injury to the vital angle Hearts due to stab wound injury. It is also is proved from the evidence on record that the robbery be committed on the highway between sunset and sunrise. The accused have been identified by the witness in the identification parade and the Car and Mobile were recovered from them. Thus, the involvement of the accused and they have been seen last together is proved by the evidence on record. Further, it is found that the accused Madansinh Sureshsinh Bingirendrasinh Tomar, Pavankumar Gangasinh Bindharmanarayan Tomar and Sonu Kalikaprasad Binrajvirsinh Thakur are absconding. 19. In the above view of the matter, we are of the considered opinion that the trial court was completely justified in convicting the appellants of the charges leveled against him. We are in complete agreement with the reasonings adopted and findings arrived at by the Sessions Judge. 20. 19. In the above view of the matter, we are of the considered opinion that the trial court was completely justified in convicting the appellants of the charges leveled against him. We are in complete agreement with the reasonings adopted and findings arrived at by the Sessions Judge. 20. However, in a recent decision of the Apex Court in the case of Bhaikon @ Bakul Borah vs. State of Assam reported in JT 2013 (10) SC 373 has held as under: 15. This Court, in a series of decisions has held that life imprisonment means imprisonment for whole of life subject to the remission power granted under Articles 72 and 161 of the Constitution of India. [Vide Life Convict @ Khoka Prasanta Sen vs. B.K. Srivastava & Ors., (2013) 3 SCC 425 , Mohinder Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2013) 3 SCC 294 , Sangeet and Anr. vs. State of Haryana, (2013) 2 SCC 452 , Rameshbhai Chandubhai Rathod (2) vs. State of Gujarat, (2011) 2 SCC 764 , Chhote Lal vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2011) 8 SCR 239, Mulla and Another vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2010) 3 SCC 508, Maru Ram vs. Union of India & Ors. (1981) 1 SCC 107 , State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Ratan Singh & Others, (1976) 3 SCC 470 and Gopal Vinayak Godse vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1961 SC 600 ]. 16. In view of the clear decisions over decades, the argument of learned senior counsel for the appellant-accused is unsustainable, at the same time, we are not restricting the power of executive as provided in the Constitution of India. For adequate reasons, it is for the said authorities to exercise their power in an appropriate case. 21. For the foregoing reasons, appeals are hereby dismissed. The judgment and order dated 09.09.2011 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Anand in Sessions Case No. 64 of 2009 is confirmed. However, life imprisonment as awarded by the trial court would not be till last breath and the case of accused may be reviewed by the appropriate authority after 14 years of their serving sentence considering the decision of Apex Court in the case of Bhaikon @ Bakul Borah (supra). The appellants shall be given benefit of remission and set off. R & P, if lying with this court, to be sent back forthwith.