For vs Unknown
2023 Latest Caselaw 890 Tri

                            Page 1 of 3

                    HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                          AGARTALA

                        IA No. 01 of 2023
                    In Crl.A(J) No. 53 of 2023

For Applicant(s)      :    Mr. B Deb, Adv.
                           Mr. V Ghosh, Adv.

For Respondent(s)     :    Mr. R Datta. PP.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. D. PURKAYASTHA

Order

16.11.2023

Heard Mr. B Deb & Mr. V Ghosh, learned counsel appearing

for the appellant and Mr. R Datta, learned PP appearing for the

respondents.

The appeal is filed against the judgment of conviction and

sentence dated 14.08.2023 passed by the learned Special Judge

(POCSO) North Tripura, Dharmanagar in Special (POCSO) No.38 of

2019 convicting the applicant-appellant under Section 354 IPC and

Section 8 of POCSO Act and sentencing him to suffer RI for four

years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of

fine, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one month, both

under Section 354 IPC and also under Section 8 of POCSO Act.

Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

Mr. B Deb, learned counsel for the applicant-appellant

submitted that there are several improvement and exaggeration in

the evidence of the DWs. Even the testimonies of DWs were not

considered by Ld. Trial Court. He also submits that the appellant

was on bail throughout the trial and never misused the liberty

granted to him. So he earnestly prays for suspension of the

operation of the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence

and to allow the appellant to go on bail.

Mr. Deb, also referred a decision of the Hon'ble apex court in

Kiran Kumar Vs. State of M.P. 2002 SCC (Cri.) 1017 wherein

referring to another decision rendered in Bhagaban Rama Sindhe

Goshai Vs. State of Gujrat it was observed that when a person is

convicted and sentenced to a short term imprisonment, the normal

rule is that when his appeal is pending the sentence should be

suspended and rejection is only by way of exception and be put

forward for such rejection.

Learned PP, however, strongly opposes such prayer and

submits that the LC records may first be called for and upon

perusal of the evidence, necessary order(s) may be passed.

However, during hearing it is revealed that the copies of

testimonies of both PWs and DWs were furnished to learned PP and

also to this court by the appellant with the suspension petition.

Taking those documents into consideration, learned PP further

submits that there are sufficient materials against the appellant in

the evidence. As such, the operation of impugned judgment of

conviction and sentence may not be suspended.

Considered the rival submission and perused the records. No

observation is being made on the evidence on record, otherwise it

may have some bearings on the merit of case to be taken up at the

stage of final hearing.

However, considering the fact that earlier during trial the

applicant-appellant was on bail and also considering the quantum

of sentence imposed on him, the operation of the impugned

judgment of conviction and sentence is hereby stayed till disposal

of the appeal.

The applicant-appellant be allowed to go on bail on furnishing

a bond of Rs. 30,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the

satisfaction of the trial court.

The interlocutory application is allowed and disposed of.

Order be communicated to the trial court immediately.

Furnish a copy of this order to Ld. Counsel of appellant.

                                                           JUDGE



SATABDI     Digitally signed by
            SATABDI DUTTA

DUTTA       Date: 2023.11.16 18:12:22
            +05'30'

Satabdi