Page 1 of 3
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
IA No. 01 of 2023
In Crl.A(J) No. 53 of 2023
For Applicant(s) : Mr. B Deb, Adv.
Mr. V Ghosh, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. R Datta. PP.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. D. PURKAYASTHA Order 16.11.2023 Heard Mr. B Deb & Mr. V Ghosh, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. R Datta, learned PP appearing for the respondents.
The appeal is filed against the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 14.08.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO) North Tripura, Dharmanagar in Special (POCSO) No.38 of 2019 convicting the applicant-appellant under Section 354 IPC and Section 8 of POCSO Act and sentencing him to suffer RI for four years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one month, both under Section 354 IPC and also under Section 8 of POCSO Act. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.
Mr. B Deb, learned counsel for the applicant-appellant submitted that there are several improvement and exaggeration in Page 2 of 3 the evidence of the DWs. Even the testimonies of DWs were not considered by Ld. Trial Court. He also submits that the appellant was on bail throughout the trial and never misused the liberty granted to him. So he earnestly prays for suspension of the operation of the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence and to allow the appellant to go on bail.
Mr. Deb, also referred a decision of the Hon'ble apex court in Kiran Kumar Vs. State of M.P. 2002 SCC (Cri.) 1017 wherein referring to another decision rendered in Bhagaban Rama Sindhe Goshai Vs. State of Gujrat it was observed that when a person is convicted and sentenced to a short term imprisonment, the normal rule is that when his appeal is pending the sentence should be suspended and rejection is only by way of exception and be put forward for such rejection.
Learned PP, however, strongly opposes such prayer and submits that the LC records may first be called for and upon perusal of the evidence, necessary order(s) may be passed.
However, during hearing it is revealed that the copies of testimonies of both PWs and DWs were furnished to learned PP and also to this court by the appellant with the suspension petition. Taking those documents into consideration, learned PP further submits that there are sufficient materials against the appellant in Page 3 of 3 the evidence. As such, the operation of impugned judgment of conviction and sentence may not be suspended.
Considered the rival submission and perused the records. No observation is being made on the evidence on record, otherwise it may have some bearings on the merit of case to be taken up at the stage of final hearing.
However, considering the fact that earlier during trial the applicant-appellant was on bail and also considering the quantum of sentence imposed on him, the operation of the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence is hereby stayed till disposal of the appeal.
The applicant-appellant be allowed to go on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 30,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.
The interlocutory application is allowed and disposed of. Order be communicated to the trial court immediately. Furnish a copy of this order to Ld. Counsel of appellant.
JUDGE
SATABDI Digitally signed by
SATABDI DUTTA
DUTTA Date: 2023.11.16 18:12:22
+05'30'
Satabdi