Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
In Re : Jayanta Maity @ Joyanta ... vs State Of Punjab on 6 September, 2021
06.09.2021
Court No.30
Avijit Mitra
CRA No. 442 of 2019
with
IA No. CRAN No. 1 of 2019 (Old No. CRAN 3543 of 2019)
(through video Conference)
In Re:- An application under section 389 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure;
And
In Re : Jayanta Maity @ Joyanta Maity
Petitioner/Appellant
Mr. Prabir Kumar Mitra,
Mr. Pinak Kumar Mitra
..... for the Petitioner/Appellant
Mr. Saurav Chatterjee,
Ms. Sayanti Santra
....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 petitioner/appellant has been convicted of offences
punishable under sections 498A/302 of the Indian Penal Code (in
short, IPC).
Mr. Mitra, learned advocate for the petitioner/appellant
submits that the appellant had been on bail during trial and he
did not misuse such liberty. He was taken into custody after
delivery of the judgment impugned and he had already suffered
incarceration for more than two years thereafter. There is also
no possibility towards early disposal of the present appeal and in
view thereof, the appellant's sentence may be suspended and he
may be enlarged on bail on any stringent condition.
He argues that there is no perceptible nexus between the
appellant and the alleged offence. On the basis of the selfsame
evidence on record the appellant had been convicted whereas
other two accused persons have been acquitted.
According to Mr. Mitra, the purported dying declaration
ought to have been disbelieved by the learned court below since
Dr. Panja, PW 20 was a student of E&T of Calcutta Medical
College and Hospital and Dr. Ghosh deposed that the stamps
beneath the signatures were not given in their presence.
Ms. Santra, learned advocate appearing for the State
submits that there are materials on record which clearly reveal
the direct involvement of the appellant in the alleged offence. On
the basis of the evidence on record the learned Court below has
convicted the appellant and at this stage, a different view cannot
be taken on the basis of the selfsame evidence on record.
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. Prima facie, the evidence on
record is not so infallible and accurate to clearly establish the guilt
against the appellant beyond reasonable doubt. Bearing in mind
the principles of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
Kashmira Singh vs. State of Punjab, reported in (1977) 4 SCC 291
and in Babu Singh vs. State of M.P., reported in (1978) 1 SCC 579
and on an overall assessment of the facts and circumstances
involved, we are of the opinion that 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.
1 of 2019 (Old No. CRAN 3543 of 2019), suspend the sentence and
direct that pending hearing of the appeal, the appellant, namely,
Jayanta Maity @ Joyanta Maity, shall be released on bail upon
furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of like amount
each, one of whom must be local, to the satisfaction of the learned
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Paschim Medinipur with a further
condition that the appellant shall meet with the Officer-in-Charge
of Pingla Police Station once in a month on and from 20 th
September, 2021 until further orders.
The application for suspension of sentence, being CRAN No.
1 of 2019 (Old No. CRAN 3543 of 2019) is, thus, disposed of.
All parties shall act on the server copies of this order duly
downloaded from the official website of this Court.
(Rabindranath Samanta, J.) (Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)
