Try out our Premium Member services: Virtual Legal Assistant, Query Alert Service and an ad-free experience. Free for one month and pay only if you like it.
rpan Ct.No.30 CRA No. 37 of 2020
CRAN Nos. 2 and 3 of 2020 [Suspension of sentence]
In Re:- Sandhya Rani Das Another
The State of West Bengal
Mr. Swagata Datta,
Ms. Sneha Chatterjee
… for the Appellants.
Mr. Saibal Bapuli,
Mr. Arijit Ganguli,
Ms. Sayanti Santra
… for the State.
The appellants in CRA 37 of 2020 have filed the present
application, being CRAN 2 of 2020, for suspension of sentence
imposed by the learned court below that has convicted them of
Penal Code. The learned court below has imposed the sentence
of rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of
Rs.10,000/- each, in default, to suffer further rigorous
imprisonment for two years.
Mr. Datta, learned advocate appearing for the appellants
submits that both the appellants are aged persons and they
were enlarged on bail during the trial and they have not misused
such liberty. There is also no possibility towards early disposal
of the present appeal.
According to him, there are fatal contradictions in the
testimonies of the prosecution witnesses. The learned court
below, even after noting such contradictions in evidence,
disregarded the same without any valid reason. The appellants
have been roped in on the basis of an alleged dying declaration.
However, the learned court below itself arrived at a finding that
‘the said dying declaration cannot be relied upon’. The charge
proved against any of the accused. In the said conspectus, there
is every chance of success in the present appeal.
Mr. Bapuli, learned advocate appearing for the State
opposes the appellants’ prayer and drawing our attention to the
contents of the impugned judgment, he submits that the
sequence of events clearly establishes the involvement of the
appellants in the offence.
We have assessed the quality of evidence recorded by the
learned court below. Prima facie, such evidence is not conclusive
and uncontrovertible in nature. Upon an overall appreciation of
the evidence and the entire facts and circumstances of the case,
we are of the opinion, that this is not a case where it cannot be
said that the appellants have no chance to succeed in the
The appellants were on bail in course of the trial and they
did not misuse such liberty. The chance of hearing of the appeal
in the near future is also remote.
Under such circumstances, without expressing any
opinion on the merits of the dispute and culpability of the
appellants, in our opinion, it would be appropriate to suspend
the sentence and grant bail to the appellants.
For the above reasons, we allow the application being
CRAN No.2 of 2020, suspend the sentence and direct that the
appellants, namely, Sandhya Rani Das and Shri Shyam
Sundar Das shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of
`20,000/- each with two sureties of like amount each, one of
whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Purulia with a further condition that the
appellant no.2 shall meet with the Officer-in-Charge,
Balarampur Police Station once a fortnight until further orders.
The application, being CRAN No. 2 of 2020 is,
accordingly, disposed of.
On the prayer of the learned advocate appearing for the
appellants, the application, being CRAN 3 of 2020, is dismissed
as not pressed.
All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly
downloaded from the official website of this Court.
(Suvra Ghosh, J.) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)