The main legal point established in the judgment is the consideration of strong and plausible grounds to assail the impugned Judgment as a basis for suspending the sentences during the pendency of the appeal.

JUDGMENT

1. The appellant applicant herein stands convicted and sentenced as below vide judgment dated 18.09.2021 passed by the learned additional Sessions Judge No.1, Nohar, District Hanumangarh in Sessions Case CIS No.21/2017:

2. The instant application for suspension of sentences has been filed on behalf of the applicant appellant seeking release on bail during pendency of the appeal.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor has filed reply to the application for suspension of sentences.

4. We have heard learned counsel representing the applicant appellant and the learned Public Prosecutor and perused the impugned Judgment and the material available on record.

5. Shri Moti Singh, learned counsel representing the applicant appellant, vehemently and fervently urged that the entire prosecution case is false and fabricated. The appellant has been convicted for the alleged murder of the child Master 'V' on 16.04.2017. The FIR came to be registered without casting suspicion on any person regarding the disappearance of the child. On 18.04.2017, dead body of the child was found buried under a heap of cow-dung. The appellant has been implicated in this case on the basis of direct testimony viz. statement of Reshma (PW-1) who did not support the prosecution case and was declared hostile. The trial court recorded a finding that presence of eye-witnesses at the place of incident is otherwise also unbelievable. The second circumstance on the basis whereof, the appellant was convicted, was alleged theory of motive in relation whereto, Manju (PW-25) mother of the deceased, alleged that she and Savitri were on enmical terms because of an incident which took place 21/2 years ago wherein, a locket worn by the appellant was broken and the appellant was continuously threatening to take revenge. Shri Moti Singh urged that the alleged theory of motive is totally unbelievable because the incident from which this inference is sought to be drawn, was a trivial one and took place about 21/2 years ago and thus, the same has no nexus with the alleged murder. Criticizing the statements of the two witnesses who gave evidence of extra-judicial confession namely Omprakash (PW-2) and Kesharam (PW-3), learned counsel Shri Moti Singh urged that the dead body of the child was recovered on 18.04.2017 whereas, these two witnesses alleged that the extra-judicial confession was made by the accused appellant before them as late as on 17.05.2017. The gross delay of more than one month in the making of alleged extra-judicial confession, makes the entire prosecution case doubtful. On these grounds, Shri Moti Singh implored the Court to accept the application for suspension of sentences and direct enlargement of the appellant on bail, during pendency of the appeal.

6. Per contra, Shri M.a. Siddiqui, learned Ga-cum-aaG, vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by the appellant's counsel and urged that the appellant was bearing a grudge against Smt. Manju, mother of the deceased child, because she had broken a locket worn by the appellant who got a chance to take revenge on 16.04.2017 because all family members of the child had gone out. accordingly, the appellant sent away her own children and thereafter, she killed Master 'V' and buried the dead body under the heap of cow-dung. The evidence of motive is also supported by the circumstance of extra-judicial confession. Hence, Shri Siddiqui implored the Court to dismiss the application for suspension of sentences.

7. We have given our th