Mohit Kumar Shah, J.—Heard the learned counsel for the appellants of the aforesaid two appeals as also learned APP for the State, Mr. Sujit Kumar Singh on the issue of suspension of sentence and grant of bail to the aforesaid two appellants.

2. The aforesaid two appeals have been preferred against the same judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 21.10.2024 and 12.11.2024 respectively, passed by the learned District & Additional Sessions Judge-V, Rohtas at Sasaram in Sessions Trial Case No. 97 of 2004 (arising out of Sanjhauli P.S. Case No. 50 of 2003) whereby and whereunder while both the appellants have been convicted under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘the I.P.C.’), the appellant of the first case has also been convicted under Section 27 of the Arms Act. By the order of sentence dated 12.11.2024, the appellants have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life under Section 302/34 of the I.P.C. with fine of Rs.10,000/- and in the event of non-payment of the same, they have been further directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. As far as appellant of the first case is concerned, he has also been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for seven years under Section 27 of the Arms Act with fine of Rs.10,000/- and in the event of non-payment of the same, he has been further directed to undergo one-year rigorous imprisonment. All these sentences have been directed to run concurrently.

3. The short facts of the case as per the fardbeyan of the informant, namely Niranti Devi (P.W. 4), who is the mother of the deceased, namely Manish Kumar Singh @ Rinku is that on 14.10.2003 at about 5:30 P.M. in the evening, she was preparing Litti in her house when her younger son, namely Manish Kumar Singh @ Rinku had taken one Litti in his hand and had gone outside the house informing her that he is going to the field to ease himself and would come soon, whereafter he had gone towards Susari Chowk. The informant has further stated that when his son did not come by 9:00 P.M. in the night, she thought that he must have gone to the place where Ramayan is being held in the village. Thereafter, again at 11:00 P.M. in the night, the informant had sent her elder son, namely Pappu Singh to search for her younger son but the whereabouts of her younger son could not be ascertained, hence she thought that he might have slept somewhere. In the morning at about 6:00 A.M., a co-villager, namely Rama Shankar Singh (P.W. 5) had come to her house and told her that Manish Kumar Singh has been killed and his dead body is lying near the newly constructed railway line. The said Rama Shankar Singh had further informed the informant that on 14.10.2003 at about 6:30 P.M., while he was sitting at the Chowk after coming through the field, he had seen his co-villager Dharmendra Sah (appellant of the second case) and one Bharat Chaudhary going along with Manish Kumar Singh towards Samhuta by the road which is situated towards east of Susari Chowk and goes to Samhuta. The informant has also stated that thereafter, her son did not return back and he was killed. The informant had also sent her son Pappu Singh to inquire about Bharat Chaudhary and Dharmendra Sah, however both were absconding since the previous night. The informant has lastly stated in her fardbeyan that Manish Kumar Singh was killed by Bharat Chaudhary and Dharmendra Sah, who have conspired together with other accomplices. On the basis of the aforesaid fardbeyan of the informant, Sanjhauli P.S. Case No. 50 of 2003 was registered on 15.10.2003 at 12:30 P.M. under Section 302/ 120(B)/34 of the I.P.C. and Section 27 of the Arms Act against Dharmendra Sah and Bharat Chaudhary.

4. The records of the aforesaid two appeals have been placed before this Court to consider the prayer of the appellants for suspension of their sentence and release on bail during the pendency of the appeal.

5. Learned counsels for the appellants of the aforesaid two appeals