A.P. Lavande. J.

By this application, the applicant seeks suspension of sentence and bail during pendency of the revision application, preferred by him against the judgment and order dated 24.10.2008 passed by the learned Session Judge, North Goa, Panaji in Criminal Appeal No. 34/2007.

2. The applicant along with two others were prosecuted, for having committed the offences under Sections 324, 307 and 504 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. The Ad hoc Assistant Session ,Judge, Mapusa by the judgment and order dated 30.04.2007 passed in Sessions Case No. 34/2005, convicted all the three accused for the offence punishable under Section 324 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced the applicant to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 45 days and to pay fine of Rs. 200/and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further simple imprisonment for a period of 4 days. Against the judgment and order, the applicant and another accused, preferred Criminal Appeal No. 34/2007 and the third accused preferred Criminal Appeal No. 50/2007. The learned Session Judge, North Goa, Panaji by common judgment and order dated 24.10.2008, dismissed both the appeals thereby maintaining the conviction and sentence' imposed by the Trial Court. The learned Session Judge directed all the accused to surrender before the Trial Magistrate to comply with the sentences imposed upon them within a period of one month from the date of passing the order.

3. When the revision application filed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Session Judge and the application for suspension of sentence and grant of bail, were taken up, the learned Counsel for the applicant, was called upon to satisfy this Court as to under which provision of law, the learned Session could have been granted time of one month to under before the Trial Court. The learned Counsel for the applicant sought time which was granted.

4. I have come across a number of Criminal appeals disposed of by the Session Judges/Additional Session Judges in the State of Goa in which the learned Judges, while maintaining the conviction of sentence of imprisonment, have granted time to the accused to surrender before the Magistrate after maintaining the conviction and sentence passed by the learned Magistrate. Since the orders granting time to surrender, after maintaining the conviction and sentence of imprisonment, appeared to me to be without any authority of law and as such without jurisdiction, I deemed it appropriate to appoint Advocate S.G. Bhobe as amicus curiae so that the issue is decided finally.

5. I have heard Mr. V.A. Lawande. learned Counsel for the applicant. Ms. W. Coutinho and Mr. C.A. Ferreira, learned Public Prosecutors for the State of Goa and Mr. S.G. Bhobe, learned amicus curiae.

6. Mr. Lawande. learned Counsel appearing for the applicant submitted that the Lower Appellate Court, after maintaining the judgment and order of conviction and sentence of imprisonment, has no power to take the accused into custody. The learned judge, necessarily should direct the Trial Magistrate to execute the sentence of imprisonment d imposed on the accused. According to the learned Counsel, the accused is not required to surrender before the High Court before the revision is taken up for hearing or before passing an order of suspending substantive sentence of imprisonment. The learned Counsel placed reliance upon the following judgments :

(i) Bihari Prasad Singh v. State of Bihar and another, reported in (2000) 10 SCC 346.

(ii) Easwaramurthy v. N. Krishnaswamy, reported in 2006 Cr LJ 4105.

7. Ms. Coutinho, learned Public Prosecutor submitted that there is no provision in the Criminal Procedure Code which gives power to the Lower Appellate Court to suspend the sentence of imprisonment or to grant time to the accused after conviction and sentence of imprisonment, is maintained. According to learned Public Prosecutor, the order passed by the learned