Page No.# 1/3 vs The State Of Assam
2023 Latest Caselaw 374 Gua

                                                          Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010013332023




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

                          Case No. : Crl.Rev.P./43/2023

         ELIASUR RAHMAN BABAR AND 2 ORS.
         S/O ABDUL KADER MIAH
         R/O VILL- BIDYAPARA PT.II,
         (WEST B.N. COLLEGE),
         P.O. AMCO ROAD,
         P.S. DHUBRI, ASSAM

         2: MD. ANISUR RAHMAN
          S/O ABDUL KADER MIAH
         R/O VILL- BIDYAPARA PT.II

         (WEST B.N. COLLEGE)

         P.O. AMCO ROAD

         P.S. DHUBRI
         ASSAM

         3: MD. JIYAUR RAHMAN
          S/O ABDUL KADER MIAH
         R/O VILL- BIDYAPARA PT.II

         (WEST B.N. COLLEGE)

         P.O. AMCO ROAD

         P.S. DHUBRI
         ASSA

         VERSUS

         THE STATE OF ASSAM
         REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM
                                                                                    Page No.# 2/3




Advocate for the Petitioner   : MR D TALUKDAR

Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM




                                     BEFORE
                    HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA

                                            ORDER

02.02.2023

Heard Mr. D. Talukdar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Addl. P.P., Assam.

This is an application under Section 397 CrPC, whereby the order dated 07.01.2023 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Chirang in Crl. A. 03/2022 is under challenge.

The criminal appeal was admitted for hearing and the sentence was suspended by the appellate court. Thereafter 6 months lapsed. Therefore, the appellate court held that after elapse of 6 months, stay cannot operate. Accordingly, the appellate court directed the petitioners/appellants to surrender before the trial court for serving out the sentence imposed upon them.

Mr. Talukdar, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the appeal is still pending. The appellate court wrongly interpreted the judgment of the Supreme Court reported in (2018) 16 SCC 299. It is further submitted that the aforesaid direction of the Supreme Court relates to only trial of the case against interlocutory order.

I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties.

I have decided to agree with the submission of Mr. Talukdar, learned counsel for the petitioner. The learned trial court has wrongly interpreted with the provisions of law and directed the appellants to surrender for serving out the sentence while the appeal is still pending. Therefore, the impugned order dated 07.01.2023 passed by the Page No.# 3/3

learned Sessions Judge, Chirang in Crl. A. 03/2022 is set aside.

The criminal revision petition is disposed of.

JUDGE Mkk

Comparing Assistant