IMPORTANT POINT
For suspending execution of sentences, the Court will look to the nature of accusation made against the accused, the manner in which the crime is alleged to have been committed, the gravity of offence and the desirability of releasing the accused on bail.

JUDGMENT

J.R. Vora, J.—Above criminal appeal is preferred by original accused No.1 of Sessions Case No.36 of 2005 of the Court of Fast Track at Porbandar, against the judgment and order delivered by Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court. Porbandar, on 15th of November, 2006, whereby the present appellant being accused No. 1 came to be convicted for the offence punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of 10 years and to pay fine of Rs. 25,000 as well as he was also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of three years and to pay fine of Rs. 10,000.

2. Criminal Appeal No. 106 of 2008 filed by original accused No. 1 came to be admitted by this Court vide Order dated 11th of July, 2008.

3. The present applicant-appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 106 of 2008 has also preferred present Criminal Misc. Application No.692 of 2008 under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for suspension of the sentences awarded to him and to release him on bail during pendency of appeal. In all there were five accused in the said Sessions Case. Present appellant-accused No. 1 came to be convicted, as aforesaid, and his father accused No.4 also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment of three years and to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/- and he has filed Criminal Appeal No. 1413 of 2007 against his conviction before this Court, and as submitted, he has been released on bail pending the said appeal. However, Criminal Appeal No. 1413 of 2007 is not the subject-matter of the present application. Rest of the three accused came to be acquitted by the Trial Court. There is no acquittal appeal till date preferred by the State against the said accused who are acquitted.

4. As per the brief facts of the prosecution case, initially, an offence came to be registered against all the five accused under Sections 302, 498A and 114 of the Indian Penal Code. Accused No. 1 happens to be husband of the deceased Alkaben while accused Nos. 2 and 3 happen to be younger brothers of accused No. 1. As aforestated, accused No.4 happens to be father of accused No. 1 and accused No.5 is mother of accused No. 1. Accused No. 1 present appellant married with deceased Alkaben on 8th of August, 1997, daughter of complainant Gunvantrai Purshottamdas Acharya and resumed the residence of in-laws at Porbandar. Deceased Alkaben in joint family of the accused resided for eight months. Thereafter, all the accused treated the deceased with physical and mental cruelty. As per the case of the prosecution, during this period, accused No. 4 exposed indecent behaviour before the deceased and at one time tried to catch the hands of the deceased and, therefore, deceased left the house of the in-laws and stayed thereafter with her parents even during the pendency of her marriage. It appears that after five years, some compromise took place between the parties and deceased again resumed in-laws house in joint family consisting of all the five accused. There also, it is the prosecution case in nutshell that within 10 days, she returned to her parental home because she had suffered mental and physical torture. Her parental home was at Bhavnagar and ultimately she decided and conveyed her parents that it was almost impossible for her to live at her in-laws house. During this time, she was doing job as Vidhya Sahayak at village Ambla, Taluka -Talaja because she had studied upto B.A., B.Ed. She again attempted to stay with in-laws but one/two time she came back to Bhavnagar on account of cruelty from the accused. On 2nd of October, 2004, accused No. 1 tried to contact deceased Alkaben, at that time, Alkaben was at Junagadh with her sister Jyotiben. Thereafter, it appears that, some communication might have taken place between the accused No. 1 and A