Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
In Re: Avijit Baidya vs State Of Gujarat on 19 July, 2021
CRA No.215 of 2020
with
19.07.21
CRAN No.1 of 2020
(S.R.) and
Sl.21 CRAN No.2 of 2020
Ct.30 and
CRAN No.3 of 2020
Via video conference
In re: An application under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure;
And
In re: Avijit Baidya ... appellant.
Mr. Kallol Mondal
Mr. Artha Sarathi Ghosh ... for the appellant.
Ms. Sukanya Bhattacharya
Md. Kutubuddin ... 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 has been convicted of offence under Section
395/397 of the Indian Penal Code.
Mr. Mondal, learned advocate appearing for the appellant
submits that the appellant is in custody for more than seven years and
had thus undergone a substantive period of the term imprisonment.
There is also no possibility towards early disposal of the present appeal.
It is well settled that when a person is convicted and sentenced to a fix
period of imprisonment, the prayer for suspension of sentence needs to
be considered liberally. In support of such contention, he has placed
reliance upon the judgements delivered in the case of Bhagwan Rama
Shinde Gosai v. State of Gujarat, reported in (1999) 5 Supreme (SC)
356 and in the case of Kiran Kumar v. State of M.P., reported in
(2000) 0 Supreme (SC) 1395.
Mr. Mondal further submits that the appellant had been roped in
on the rudiments of mere suspicion and the circumstances do not
consistently point towards his guilt. There are also contradictions in
the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses and in view thereof, there
is every chance of success in the present appeal.
Ms. Bhattacharya, learned advocate appearing for the State
opposes the appellant's prayer and drawing the attention of this Court
to the contents of the judgments, she submits that the sequence of
events clearly establishes the involvement of the appellant in the
offence.
We have assessed the quality of evidence as recorded by the
learned court below. Every link in the chain of circumstances unless
connected together may give rise to suspicion. Prima facie, the evidence
of record is not so infallible and accurate to clearly establish the guilt.
The appellant may be able to demonstrate at the hearing of appeal that
he had no major involvement.
Under such circumstances, without expressing any opinion on
the merits of the dispute and culpability of the appellant, in our
opinion, it would be appropriate to suspend the sentence and to grant
bail to the appellant.
For these reasons, we allow the application being CRAN No.3 of
2020, suspend the sentence and direct that the appellant, namely,
Avijit Baidya shall be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of
Rs.20,000/- with two sureties of like amount each, one of them must be
local subject to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate, Calcutta with a further condition that the appellant shall
meet with the officer-in-charge of Burrabazar Police Station once a
fortnight until further orders.
The application being CRAN No.3 of 2020 is, accordingly,
disposed of.
The applications being CRAN No.1 of 2020 and CRAN No.2 of
2020 had already been disposed of by the earlier orders of this Court.
All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly
downloaded from the official website of this Court.
(Suvra Ghosh, J.) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)
