Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, J., SANJAY PRASAD, J.
Dasai Oraon – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The instant interlocutory application has been filed on behalf of all the appellants, namely, (1). Dasai Oraon; (2). Munna Oraon and (3). Pappu Oraon, under Section 430 (1) of the BNSS , 2023 for suspension of sentence dated 23.12.2024, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Lohardaga in Sessions Trial No. 192/2022 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 507 of 2022, whereby appellant no. 1 has been convicted under sections 307 I.P.C. and 323/34 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 5 years and fine of Rs. 5,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 307 I.P.C. and in case of default in depositing the fine amount, the appellant no. 1 has been directed to undergo further simple imprisonment of 3 months and further sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for Rigorous Imprisonment for 1 year and fine of Rs. 500/- for the offence punishable under Section 323 /34 of the I.P.C. and in case of default in depositing the fine amount, the appellant no. 1 has been directed to undergo further simple imprisonment for 15 days.
2. Further the appellant no. 2 and 3 has been convicted under sections 304/34 Part-1 and 323/34 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonm
Suspension of sentence granted where injuries classified as simple and lack of intent to kill evidenced by trial court findings.
The court allowed the suspension of sentence for the appellant based on the identical circumstances of co-accused who were granted bail, affirming that significant time served in custody justified th....
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.
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 maintained that a convicted individual could be granted bail during appeal based on parity with co-defendants, while still upholding the conviction until the appeal is resolved.
Evidence of a prolonged relationship can influence the decision for suspending a sentence under IPC provisions, particularly where the victim's testimony supports the defense.
Suspension of sentence is justified when the appeal process is delayed significantly and key witness credibility is in question.
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
