Mohit Kumar Shah, J. –

I.A. No. 01 of 2025:

The present interlocutory application has been filed by the appellant No.2, namely Krishna Prasad, for suspension of his sentence and grant of bail during the pendency of the present appeal.

2. Heard Sri Sanjeet Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Vikash Kumar Pankaj, learned counsel appearing for the informant and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State Sri Bipin Kumar.

3. The aforesaid appeal has been preferred under Section 415 (2) of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, against the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence dated 02.04.2025 and 07.04.2025 respectively, passed by the learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-V, East Champaran at Motihari in Sessions Trial No. 576 of 2023, arising out of Raxaul P.S. Case No. 152 of 2021, whereby and whereunder the appellants have been convicted under Section 302/34, 328/34, 420/34 and 406/34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the ‘IPC’) and they have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life under Section 302/34 of the IPC with fine of Rs.20,000/- and in default of the payment of same, they have been further directed to undergo simple imprisonment for three months. The Appellants have also been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years under Section 328/34 of the IPC with fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of the same they have been further directed to undergo three months simple imprisonment. The Appellants have further been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years under Section 420/34 of the IPC with fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of the same they have been further directed to undergo one-month simple imprisonment. Lastly, the Appellants have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years under Section 406/34 of the IPC with fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of the same they have been further directed to undergo one-month simple imprisonment. All the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.

4. The case of the prosecution in brief, as per the FIR bearing Raxaul P.S. Case No. 152 of 2021, registered under Sections 328, 302, 420 and 406/34 of the Indian Penal Code against the appellants on the basis of the written report of the father of the deceased, namely Vijay Kumar Sah (PW-9) is that the minor son of the informant, namely Piyush Kumar had fallen in bad company and used to steal money from his home. The informant has further stated in the written report that his son (deceased) had taken away huge sums of money from his house and had given it to the appellants and upon having come to know about it, while he was making a programme with his neighbors to go to the appellants and make inquiries from them in presence of his son, in the meantime on 27.04.2021, the appellant No.1 had taken the deceased to his shop, had mixed poison in the cold drink and made him drink the same, which the deceased had consumed and then he had left him at Kali Temple in a state of unconsciousness. Thereafter, the informant had taken the deceased to Duncan Hospital, Raxaul, where during the course of treatment in the I.C.U., his son died on 28.04.2021 at 04:00 PM. The informant has further stated that he is confident that the appellants have mixed poison in the cold drink, had offered the same to his son Piyush Kumar, who had consumed it and on account of the same his son has died.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant No.2 has submitted by referring to the evidence of PW 1, i.e. Dr. Sheena Evelyn, the doctor who had treated the deceased at Duncan Hospital, Raxaul that she has stated in her evidence that the deceased was brought to the hospital with the alleged history of consumption of Aluminum Phosphide, however the police was not informed immediately, leading to prejudice to the defence, inasmuch as in case the police would have arrived on the same day, proper investigation would have bee