The court allowed the suspension of sentence for the appellant, emphasizing the importance of evaluating the duration of custody and justifying the conviction under relevant laws.

ORDER :

I.A. No.1742 of 2025

1.The instant interlocutory application has been filed on behalf of appellant under Section 430(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for suspension of sentence dated 06.09.2024 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-1, Seraikella Kharsawan in connection with S.T. Case No.94 of 2023, arising out of Adityapur P.S. Case No.14 of 2023 whereby and whereunder, the appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life along with fine of Rs.20,000/- and in default of payment of fine, further S.I. for one year.

2. It has been contended on behalf of the appellant that he, being the son, is facing the conviction due to death of his mother, who as per the allegation made in the First Information Report instituted by his sister to be a case of killing her.

3. It has been contended that the mother, who was aged about 75 years, was living alone although under the attendants in the different house. The argument primarily has been made that there is no ingredient of Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant has already remained in custody for more than two years. As such, it is a fit case where the sentence may be suspended.

4. While on the other hand, Ms. Kumari Rashmi, learned counsel appearing for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for suspension of sentence.

5. It has been submitted by referring to the testimony of the witnesses particularly the elder sister and the son of the elder sister who have been examined as P.W.1 and P.W.6 have fully supported the prosecution version.

6. Learned counsel for the State, on the basis of the aforesaid argument, has submitted that it is, therefore, not a fit case for suspension of sentence.

7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the finding recorded by the learned Court in the impugned judgment as also the testimony available in the lower court record.

8. The deceased was the mother of the appellant who was having the age of 75 years and old ailing lady. As per the prosecution version, she was forced to live alone by the appellant in the separate rented house. As per the allegation, the appellant has not taken care of his old ailing mother even it has come that the deceased was also assaulted as was informed by the deceased during her life time to the P.W.1 and P.W.6.

The appellant, therefore, has been convicted under Section 302 of the I.P.C.

9. The appellant has remained in custody for more than two years, as such, this Court, therefore, inclined to allow this instant interlocutory application for suspension of sentence.

10. Accordingly, the instant interlocutory application being I.A. No. 1742 of 2025 stands allowed.

11. In consequence thereof, the appellant, above named, is directed to be released on bail during pendency of the instant appeal on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-1, Seraikella Kharsawan in connection with S.T. Case No.94 of2023, arising out of Adityapur P.S. Case No.14 of 2023.

12. It is made clear that any observation made herein will not prejudice the issue on merit as the appeal is lying pending for its consideration.