No. 3(02) / 2015 ; vs In Re : Sadhan Sardar
2021 Latest Caselaw 4411 Cal

26.08.2021 Court No.30

Krishnendu Bail Granted C.R.A. No. 251 of 2020 With C.R.A.N. No. 2 of 2021 (Via video Conference)

In Re:- An application for suspension of sentence under section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, being C.R.A.N. No. 2 of 2021, arising out of Sessions Case No. 367 /2013, Sessions Trial No. 3(02) / 2015 ;

And In Re : Sadhan Sardar Appellant/Petitioner Mr. Sudip Ghosh Chowdhury For the Appellant/Petitioner Mr. Saibal Bapuli Mr. Arani Bhattacharya For the State

This is an application for an order of suspension of sentence

and grant of bail pending appeal against an order of conviction

and sentence. The appellant/petitioner has been convicted of

offences punishable under sections 395/397307/412 of the

Indian Penal Code.

Mr. Ghosh Chowdhury, learned advocate appearing for the

appellant/petitioner submits that the appellant is in custody for

about eight years five months and has thus already suffered the

sentence in respect of the offences pertaining to sections

395/397 of IPC and a substantive period of the term

imprisonment pertaining to the offence under Section 307 of IPC.

There is also no possibility towards early disposal of the appeal.

Out of the five accused persons including the appellant, three

have already served out the sentence and have been released.

In the said conspectus, the appellant's sentence may be

suspended and he may be enlarged on bail on any stringent

condition.

He further submits that the guilt of the appellant pertaining

to the offence under section 307 of IPC has not been established

by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt. There are fatal

inconsistencies in the depositions of the prosecution witnesses

but the learned court below has disregarded the same without

any valid reason. In view thereof, it cannot be said that the

appellant has no chance of success in the present appeal.

The learned advocate appearing for the State opposes the

appellant's prayer and submits that the sequence of events

clearly establishes the complicity of the appellant. The judgment

impugned does not suffer from any patent infirmity and the

evidence on record is sufficient to convict the appellant.

We have heard the learned advocates appearing for the

respective parties and have assessed the quality of the evidence

recorded by the learned court below.

On an overall appreciation of the facts, the evidence on

record and prima facie merits of the appeal, we are of the

opinion that this is not a case where it can be said that the

appellant has no chance of success in the appeal. The appellant

has also undergone a substantial part of the term imprisonment.

For these reasons, we allow the application, being C.R.A.N.

No. 2 of 2021, suspend the sentence and direct that pending

hearing of the appeal, the appellant, namely, Sadhan Sardar,

shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.20,000/-

with two sureties of like amount each, one of whom must be

local, to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Hooghly at Chinsurah with a further condition that the appellant

shall meet with the Officer-in-Charge of Pandua Police Station

once a week on and from 6th September, 2021 until further

orders.

The application for suspension of sentence, being C.R.A.N.

No. 2 of 2021 is, thus, disposed of.

All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly

downloaded from the official website of this Court.

(Subhasis Dasgupta, J) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, J)