The court established that non-vital injuries and prior bail status can justify the suspension of a sentence during an appeal.

ORDER

1. The appellant herein has been convicted and sentenced as below vide judgment dated 08.02.2023 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh, in Session Case No.09/2023 (52/2023):

2. The appellant-applicant has preferred the application for suspension of sentence under Section 389 Cr.P.C. for release on bail during the pendency of the appeal.

3. It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. It is submitted with reference to statements of Medical Officer PW.9- Dr. Pramod Jaiman, PW.11- Dr. O.P. Dayma coupled with X-ray (Exhibit-P/14) and final opinion of the doctor (Exhibit-D/4) that the injured had suffered fracture on his hand and leg, which are not vital parts of the body. PW.11- Dr. O.P. Dayma, admitted in his crossexamination that he had only expressed possibility of fracture likely to be fatal to his life.

4. Submissions have been made that other co-convict, namely, Bala Ram and Pushpendra @ Pushkar have been granted bail while suspending their sentence in D.B. Criminal Misc Suspension of Sentence Application (Appeal) No.126/2023 by order dated 17.04.2023. Submissions have been made though it is alleged against the applicant that he was brandishing a sword, no sword has been recovered and what has been allegedly recovered, is a knife and as such, the entire story being false, the conviction is baseless. Further submissions have been made that the applicant was on bail during trial and the final hearing of the appeal is likely to take long time.

5. Learned Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the submissions advance and submitted that as the recovery has been made from the applicant, he is not entitled to bail, however, it is not disputed that the injuries are on not on vital parts.

6. Having considered the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and after carefully scrutinizing the record of the case, without making any observations on merits of the case, we are inclined to suspend the substantive sentence of the appellantapplicant- Sohan Lal S/o Sh. Bala Ram, during the pendency of the appeal.

7. Accordingly, the instant application for suspension of sentence filed under Section 389 Cr.P.C. is allowed and it is ordered that the substantive sentence passed by the Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh in Session Case No.09/2023 (52/2023) against the appellant-applicant- Sohan Lal S/o Sh. Bala Ram, shall remain suspended till final disposal of the aforesaid appeal and he shall be released on bail, provided he executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of learned trial Judge for his appearance in this court on 26.06.2023 and whenever ordered to do so till the disposal of the appeal on the conditions indicated below:

1. That he will appear before the trial court in the month of January of every year till the appeal is decided.

2. That if the applicant change the place of residence, he will give in writing their changed address to the trial Court as well as to the counsel in the High Court.

3. Similarly, if the sureties change their address(s) they will give in writing their changed address to the trial court.

8. The learned trial court shall keep the record