SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Apex Court In The Case Of The Atul … vs State Of U.P on 24 March, 2017

p.d.                                    CRAN No.4418 of 2016
                                              in
                                         CRA No.629 of 2016

In re:- Bidhan Biswas Ors. … Appellants.

Re: An application for suspension of sentence under Section 389
Cr.P.C. being CRAN No.4418/2016 affirmed on 18.11.2016 in
connection with Sessions Trial No.II(VI)2013 corresponds to Sessions
Case No.99(3) of 2013.

Mr. Asis Sanyal,
Mr. Anindya Sundar Chatterjee … For the appellants.

Mrs. Puspita Saha …. For the State.

In a sessions trial, these six appellants were convicted under

Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 498A of

the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment

for 10 years and rigorous imprisonment for 3 years thereunder

respectively and to pay fines with default clauses.

Now, after the appeal being admitted, with the liberty granted

admitting the appeal, they have now approached this Court for

suspension of sentence and their release on bail.

The learned Counsel for the appellants submits that not a

single witness of the nieghbourhood has been examined to support

the case of the prosecution that there was demand of dowry soon

before the death of the victim housewife. He further submits that only

the relation of the de facto complainant has been examined. Lastly, he
2

submits that this is a case of term imprisonment and the appellants

were all through on bail during trial and they never misused their

liberty.

It be noted that before taking any decision in the matter, since

objection was raised vehemently from the side of the State, we

accorded an opportunity to Mrs. Puspita Saha, the learned Counsel to

file her written objection in the light of the decision of the Hon’ble

Apex Court in the case of the Atul Tripathi -Vs- State of U.P.,

reported in (2014) 9 SCC 177, and in terms of the proviso to sub-

section (1) of section 389 Cr.P.C. but she declined to file the same in

writing and intended to resist this application orally on the strength of

the available materials on record.

Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the appellants as

well as the learned Counsel for the State.

We have gone through impugned judgment as also the copy of

the depositions of the witnesses produced before us and the other

materials on record.

Now, having regard to above and considering the findings on

which the impugned order is based and the grounds on which the

same is under challenge and the fact that this is a case of term

imprisonment and the appellants were all through on bail during trial

and they never misused their liberty, we are of the opinion that the
3

appellants have out a prima facie case showing their possibilities of

successes in the appeal.

Accordingly, we direct that pending hearing of the appeal, the

order of execution of sentence shall remain suspended and the

appellants shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of the learned

Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nadia upon furnishing a bond of

Rs.10,000/- each with two sureties of Rs.5,000/- each for each of the

appellants, one of whom must be local.

The application for suspension of sentence being CRAN

No.4418 of 2016 is, thus, disposed of.

Office is directed to once again call for the LCR, if the same

have not yet been received by it and after receiving the same, the

department concerned is directed to prepare the requisite number of

paper books within six months thereafter and as soon as the

preparation of paper books is complete and the appeal is made ready

for hearing, the same shall be placed for hearing before the

appropriate Bench.

(Ashim Kumar Roy, J.)

(Malay Marut Banerjee, J.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2020 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation