Gauhati High Court
Sukhuram Satnami vs The State Of Assam on 20 August, 2025
Author: Manish Choudhury
Bench: Manish Choudhury
Page No. 1/4
GAHC010045312025
undefined
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/758/2025
SUKHURAM SATNAMI
S/O SHRI MADAN SATNAMI
R/O VILL SATNAMI GAON
PS HOWRAGHAT
DISTRICT-KARBI ANGLONG
ASSAM
PIN-782481
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM
REPRESENTED BY PP
ASSAM
2:GORIBA SATNAMI
S/O - LATE ASAMIA SATNAMI
R/O - VILL - SATNAMI GAON
P.S. - HOWRAGHAT
DIST - KARBI ANGLONG
ASSAM
PIN - 782481
Advocate for : SABRISH AHMED
Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM
Page No. 2/4
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY
ORDER
Date : 20.08.2025
Heard Mr. S. Ahmed, learned counsel for the accused-appellant; Mr. M.P. Goswami,
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for opposite party-respondent no. 1, State of Assam; and
Ms. P.B. Bordoloi, learned Legal Aid Counsel for the opposite party-respondent no.
2/informant.
2. The instant application under Section 430 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
[BNSS], 2023 is preferred by the applicant-appellant seeking suspension of the execution of
the sentence passed against him and for his release on bail.
3. The applicant as the appellant has preferred the accompanying criminal appeal under
Section 415[2] of the BNSS against a Judgment dated 06.12.2024 and an Order on sentence
dated 07.12.2024 passed by the Court of learned Special Judge [POCSO], Karbi Anglong,
Diphu ['the Special Court', for short] in POCSO Case no. 28/2018. By the Judgment and the
Order on sentence, the applicant-appellant has been convicted for the offences under Section
448 and Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code [IPC] and Section 8 of the Protection of
Children from Sexual Offences [POCSO] Act, 2012.
4. For the offence under Section 448, IPC, the applicant-appellant has been sentenced to
undergo simple imprisonment for three months. For the offence under Section 366, IPC, the
applicant-appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years
and to pay a fine of Rs. 20,000/- with default stipulation. For the offence under Section 8 of
the POCSO Act, the applicant-appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/- with default stipulation.
5. It has been held in Bhagwan Rama Shinde Gosai vs. State of Gujarat reported
in [1999] 4 SCC 421, to the effect that when a convicted person is sentenced to a fixed
period of sentence and when he files an appeal under any statutory right, suspension of
sentence can be considered by the appellate court liberally unless there are exceptional
circumstances. It has been further observed that it would be a different matter if there is any
statutory restriction against suspension of sentence. Similarly, when the sentence is life
imprisonment, the consideration for suspension of sentence is to be approached in a different
manner.
6. It has been observed in Narcotic Control Bureau vs. Lakhwinder Singh, 2025
INSC 190, that in the case of fixed-term sentences, if the Courts start adopting a rigid
approach, in a large number of cases, till the appeal reaches the stage of the final hearing,
the accused would undergo the entire sentence which would be a violation of the rights of
the accused under Article 21 of the Constitution and it would defeat the right of appeal.
7. In Omprakash Sahni vs. Jaiprakash Chaudhary and another, [2023] 6 SCC
123, the observations made in Bhagwan Rama Shinde Gosai [supra] have been referred
to.
8. In Aasif @ Pasha vs. the State of U.P. and others, 2025 INSC 944, the
appellant was inter-alia convicted for the offence under Sections 7 and 8 of the POCSO Act
and he came to be sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four years and to pay a
fine of Rs. 4,000/-. The Hon'ble Supreme Court referring to the decision in Bhagwan Rama
Shinde Gosai [supra] has observed in similar manner.
9. Having regard to the projections made on behalf of the applicant-appellant; and the
law regarding suspension of sentence and grant of bail pending disposal of the appeal in
cases of conviction resulting in sentences for fixed-term, this Court is of the view that the
applicant-appellant has made out a prima facie case for suspension of the execution of the
sentences passed against him, pending disposal of the appeal.
10. It is, therefore, ordered that till disposal of Criminal Appeal no. 253/2025, which has
already been admitted today for hearing, execution of the sentence passed against the
applicant-appellant shall remain suspended and the applicant-appellant is allowed to be
released on bail subject to furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety each of the
like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.
11. The application stands allowed of in the afore-stated terms.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
