High CourtsDivision Bench

Bhombol Ghosh vs State

Calcutta High Court · Decided on 26 September 2019 · Citation: (2019) 09 CAL CK 0350

HON’BLE JUDGES
Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, C.J · Arijit Banerjee, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 302, 364
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Appeal (CRA) No. 239 Of 2019, CRAN No. 2543 Of 2019
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

15 paragraphs · 572 words

In re : C.R.A.N. 2543 of 2019

We have heard learned senior counsel for the appellants in this application seeking suspension of sentence and bail pending appeal against order of conviction and sentence handed down by the Court of Sessions.

After having found the appellants guilty of offence punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, the accused appellant nos.1 to 3 also stand convicted for the offence found to be punishable under Section 364 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor took us through various aspects of the evidence. We have assessed the quality of the findings rendered by the Court of Sessions in the backdrop of the evidence not only as reflected through the judgment but also in the certified copy of certain materials, which we have perused from out of court records. This includes the post mortem report, which was prepared by P.W.7. We have closely examined the testimony of P.W.7 and assessed the quality of injuries qua the allegations made.

Immediate importance of the fact is that the testimony of P.W.1 (mother of the victim) does not apparently and completely inculpate the different persons other than the first accused. We also notice that some contradictions have been brought out as between the statements made by P.W.1 in Court and the version given by her to the Investigating Officer.

Evaluating the totality of the facts and circumstances and the nature of allegations, we are of the view that this is abundantly a fit case where the accused appellant nos.2 to 7, namely, applicant nos.2 to 7 in this CRAN can be granted an order suspending their sentence on terms.

While the application in so far as it relates to the first applicant is concerned, the same is liable to be dismissed.

In the result, CRAN 2543 of 2019 is ordered as follows :-

( I ) This application in so far as it is by and on behalf of the appellant no.1 (applicant no.1), is dismissed ;

(II) In so far as this application relates to the appellant nos.2 to 7 (applicant nos.2 to 7), the sentence imposed on them vide judgment and order dated 1.3.2019 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track 3rd Court, Krishnagar, Nadia in Sessions Trial No. 4(11) 17 arising out of Sessions Case No.07(06) 17 shall remain suspended during the pendency of this appeal on condition that each of them furnishes bond of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousands only) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nadia at Krishnagar and on further condition that the appellant nos.2 to 7 (Applicant nos.2 to 7) shall report to the Officer-in-charge of Chapra Police Station once a month until further orders.

This order of suspension of sentence and grant of bail is made further conditional on the appellant nos.2 to 7 (applicant nos.2 to 7) being present or represented as and when the appeal is taken up for hearing.

Paper Books be prepared within four weeks from the date of receipt of lower court records.

Let the main appeal be listed for final hearing as soon as paper books are ready.

The application being C.R.A.N. 2543 of 2019 is disposed of.

Urgent Photostat Certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied expeditiously after complying with all necessary legal formalities.