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
8 paragraphs · 210 wordsGautam Kumar Choudhary, J
I.A. No. 554 of 2024
Heard learned counsel for the appellant in this interlocutory application which has been filed under Section 389(1) of Cr.P.C. on behalf of the appellant for suspension of sentence during pendency of the appeal who has been convicted in S.T. No. 297/2021 under Section 436 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years.
The matter involves setting on fire the house of the informant causing loss assessed to Rs.40,000/-.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the motive of offence has not been proved and there is no direct eye witness to the incidence and the prosecution rests on the testimony of CCTV footage. The appellant has served sentence for more than two years.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer made in the interlocutory application.
Considering the submissions of learned counsel and the fact as discussed above, the appellant, above named, is directed to be enlarged on bail, during the pendency of the appeal, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000 (Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of court below in connection with S.T. No. 297/2021.
I.A. No. 554 of 2024 stands disposed of.