Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
2000 vs In Re : Maya Soren on 23 July, 2021
23.07.2021
Court No.30
Avijit Mitra
C.R.A. No. 2 of 2021 (through video Conference)
With
C.R.A.N. No. 1 of 2021
In Re:- An application under section 389(1) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure arising out of Sessions Case No. 25(5) of
2000, Sessions Trial No. 04(11) of 2000;
And
In Re : Maya Soren
Petitioner/Appellant
Mr. Mayukh Mukherjee,
Mr. Abhishek Dutt,
Ms. Mehfuza Khatun
For the Petitioner/Appellant
Ms. Faria Hossain,
Mr. Aniket Mitra,
Mr. Saryati Dutta
For the State
The appellant in CRA 2 of 2021 has filed the present CRAN
1 of 2021 for suspension of sentence imposed by the learned
Court below that has convicted her of offence under Section
304B of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Court below has
imposed the sentence of 10 years rigorous imprisonment upon
the appellant.
Mr. Mukherjee, learned advocate appearing for the
appellant submits that the entire case is based on circumstantial
evidence. There are fatal contradictions in the testimonies of the
prosecution witnesses. The contents of the complaint do not
tally with the deposition of the de facto complainant being
P.W.1. In the complaint, no role has been attributed to the
appellant herein. The learned Court below has disregarded such
discrepancies, without any valid reason. In the said conspectus,
there is every chance of success in the present appeal.
Mr. Mukherjee further submits that the appellant had all
along been on bail in course of the trial and she has not misused
her liberty. There is also no possibility towards early disposal of
the present appeal.
Mr. Mitra, learned advocate appearing for the State opposes
the appellant's prayer and drawing the attention of this Court to
the contents of the judgment, he submits that the sequence of
events clearly establishes the involvement of the appellant in
the offence.
Heard the learned advocates and considered the materials
on record.
It appears that the appellant was on bail in course of the
trial and she did not misuse her liberty. The chance of disposal
of the present appeal in the near future is also remote.
We have assessed the quality of the evidence recorded by
the learned Court below. Prima facie, such evidence is not of
conclusive and incontrovertible in nature and is subject to a
margin of error. On an overall appreciation of the evidence and
the entire facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the
opinion that this is not the case where it can be said that the
appellant has no chance of succeeding in the present appeal.
For these reasons, we allow this application, suspend the
sentence and direct that pending hearing of the appeal, the
petitioner/appellant, namely, Maya Soren, 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, Alipore, South 24-
Parganas.
The application for suspension of sentence, being C.R.A.N.
No. 1 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.
(Suvra Ghosh, J) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, J)
