Back
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
Madan Chandravanshi @ Madan Ram Son of Late Sita – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
ORDER :
I.A. No.10583 of 2024 in Cr. A.(DB) No. 1147/2024,
I.A. No. 11285 of 2024 in Cr. A.(DB) No. 1194/2024 &
I.A. No. 1592 of 2024 in Cr. A.(DB) No. 1264/2024
1. All these interlocutory applications have been filed under Section 430 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 by which these appellants-applicants have prayed for suspension of sentence dated 16.08.2024 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Garhwa in Sessions Trial No.358 of 2022, arising out of Garhwa P.S. Case No.329 of 2022 (corresponding to G.R. Case No.230 of 2023) whereby and whereunder, the appellants have been convicted for the offences under Sections 302 /34 and 120B of the INDIAN PENAL CODE and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life for the offence punishable under Section 302 /34 of the I.P.C. along with fine of Rs.20,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, further R.I. for six months each and also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life for the offence punishable under Section 120(B) of the I.P.C. along with fine of Rs.20,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, further R.I. for six months each .
2. It has been contended by learned counsel appearing for the appellants-appl
The court ruled that the appellants demonstrated insufficient overt acts contributing to the crime, allowing for bail pending appeal.
The court upheld the conviction under Section 304(B) IPC, emphasizing that the absence of new grounds and insufficient custody period do not justify suspension of sentence.
The court ruled that the evidence did not support a conviction for murder as the assault was not fatal, justifying the suspension of the sentence.
Suspension of sentence granted due to lack of specific evidence against the appellant and completion of nine years of imprisonment, highlighting the importance of attributability in criminal convicti....
The court upheld the conviction for gang rape based on credible victim testimony, ruling that contradictions and co-accused acquittals do not automatically justify sentence suspension.
Suspension of sentence is only granted in exceptional circumstances, particularly when the conviction may not be sustainable, which was not established in this case.
The court established that co-convicts granted bail on similar grounds justified the suspension of the appellant's sentence, ensuring equitable treatment under law.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
