Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT GOA
Manish Pitale, J.
Anton Paulo Britto - Appellant
Versus
State Of Goa - Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 795 of 2021 F In Criminal Appeal No. 794 of 2021(Filing No)
Decided On : 02-12-2021
Suspension of Sentence - Prima Facie Case - The court allowed the application for suspension of sentence based on the strong prima facie case presented by the applicant, challenging the order of conviction and sentence. The court considered the lack of evidence, including the absence of the alleged weapon and the testimony of an alleged eyewitness, leading to the decision to suspend the sentence.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant sought suspension of the sentence imposed by the Sessions Court based on a strong prima facie case challenging the order of conviction and sentence. The applicant had been released on bail during the trial and had abided by all conditions imposed.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the evidence presented, including the testimony of an alleged eyewitness and the absence of the alleged weapon, indicated a strong prima facie case for suspension of the sentence. The court allowed the application and suspended the sentence, subject to the applicant depositing the fine amount imposed by the Sessions Court.
Issues: The issues involved the strength of the prima facie case challenging the order of conviction and sentence, the lack of evidence including the absence of the alleged weapon, and the testimony of the alleged eyewitness.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision to suspend the sentence was based on the strong prima facie case presented by the applicant, the lack of evidence including the absence of the alleged weapon, and the testimony of the alleged eyewitness indicating that the applicant was not present at the scene of the offence.
Final Decision: The court allowed the application for suspension of the sentence and suspended the sentence, subject to the applicant depositing the fine amount imposed by the Sessions Court within a specified period.
JUDGMENT
Manish Pitale, J. - Heard Mr. D. Lawande, Advocate for the applicant.
2. It is submitted that the applicant has a very strong prima facie case in the accompanying appeal challenging the order of conviction and sentence dated 13/10/2021 imposed by the Sessions Court.
3. It is submitted that only the victim in the present case has deposed against the applicant and an alleged eyewitness came forward and stated that he was not even present at the scene of offence. It is submitted that there is no recovery of the alleged weapon and that this is also a fact indicating that the Sessions Court has erred in sentencing the applicant under Sections 341 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code.
4. It is further pointed out that the applicant was released on bail during the pendency of the trial, by an order dated 07/04/2021 and he has abided by all the conditions that were imposed in the order granting bail.
5. The applicant undertakes to abide by the conditions that may be imposed by this Court.
6. This Court perused the impugned judgment and order. The material on record does show that an alleged eyewitness deposed before the Sessions Court that he was not even present at the scene of offence. That leaves only the evidence of the victim implicating the applicant in the present case.
7. In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that a case is made out for suspension of sentence and accordingly the application is allowed. The sentence is suspended, subject to the applicant depositing fine amount of Rs.25,000/- imposed by the Sessions Court within a period of two weeks from today, if not already deposited.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
