Rajen Rai @ Rajen Ray vs The State Of Assam And Anr
2022 Latest Caselaw 3802 Gua

                                                                          Page No.# 1/2

GAHC010167422022




                              THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

             I.A.(Crl.)/519/2022

             RAJEN RAI @ RAJEN RAY
             S/O LATE ADHIRAM RAY
             VILL.- BARSADERI
             P.S.- PATACHARKUCHI
             DIST.- NALBARI, ASSAM.

             VERSUS

             THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR
             REP. BY THE P.P. ASSAM.

             2:HEMANTA KUMAR CHAKRABORTY
             S/O LATE A. CHAKRABORTY
              R/O BASISTHA
              P.S.- BASISTHA
              DIST.- KAMRUP(M), ASSAM.

             Advocate for : MR. N BARMAN
             Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR


                                    BEFORE
                       HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN

                                        ORDER

26-09-2022

Heard Mr. N. Barman, learned counsel for the applicant-appellant. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam, for the respondent No. 1.

Page No.# 2/2

This interlocutory application, under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is preferred by the applicant-appellant, Rajen Rai @ Rajen Ray, for suspension of the judgment and order dated 20-07-2022, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Nalbari, in Sessions Case No. 86 of 2008, under Sections 147/148/149/448/341/307/ 326/323 of the IPC.

It is to be noted here that by the aforesaid judgment and order, the learned Court below has convicted and sentenced the applicant-appellant to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months and also to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, with default stipulation, for the offence punishable under Section 324 of the IPC, further to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, with default stipulation, for the offence under Section 323 of the IPC, and further to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month and also to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, with default stipulation, for the offence punishable under Section 448 of the IPC.

The connected appeal has already been admitted and the record has already been called for.

Considering the submission of the learned advocates for both sides and considering the materials on record and the grounds mentioned in the petition, this interlocutory application stands allowed.

The impugned judgment and order dated 20-07-2022 stands stayed till disposal of the appeal and the applicant-appellant is allowed to remain on previous bail.

In terms of the above, the interlocutory application stands disposed of.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant