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
7 paragraphs · 392 wordsNaresh Kumar Sanghi, J.
Criminal Misc. No. 8823 of 2012
By way of present criminal miscellaneous, the applicant-appellants have prayed for suspension of their sentence. Earlier Pappu Kumar-applicant No. 1 had filed Criminal Miscellaneous No. M�60346 of 2011, while Balvir Kumar @ Billu @ Bablu-applicant No. 2 had filed Criminal Miscellaneous No. M-27155 of 2011 and both the said applications were dismissed as withdrawn. Now the applicants have filed the present application on the strength of the compromise, effected between the injured Nar Singh and the applicants. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that out of the maximum awarded sentence of 07 years, each applicant has suffered incarceration for 01 year and approximately 06 months. He further submits that during pendency of the trial, the complainant had effected a compromise with the applicant-appellants but while deciding the case, the learned trial court did not consider the same. He further submits that now once again the compromise between the injured and the applicants has been reduced into writing, which has been admitted by learned counsel for the complainant. He further submits that there are arguable points in the appeal, therefore, the applicant-appellants deserve the concession of benefit of the suspended sentence. The learned counsel for the complainant/ injured, Nar Singh, has produced the affidavit of Nar Singh, which is taken on record. In the said affidavit, the complainant Nar Singh has admitted the factum of compromise and has no objection if the sentence of the applicants is suspended and they are ordered to be released on bail.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the grant of bail to the applicant-appellants.
Heard.
Out of the maximum awarded sentence of 07 years, each applicant has suffered incarceration for 01 year and approximately 06 months. The matter has been compromised with injured-Nar Singh. There are fairly arguable points in the appeal. The appeal is not likely to be heard in near future.
Keeping in view the totality of the circumstances of the case, the substantive sentence of the applicant-appellants Pappu Kumar son of Munshi Ram and Balvir Kumar @ Billu @ Bablu son of Pappu, is ordered to be suspended during the pendency of the appeal subject to their furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Ludhiana. The criminal miscellaneous application is disposed of.
