BIJENDRA SINGH Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I.A.No.1834/2012.

(2.) THIS is the third application filed by the appellant for suspension of his sentence. The first two applications filed by him were withdrawn by the counsel for the appellant on 11th February, 2011 and 16th March, 2011 respectively. These first two applications were withdrawn by him after hearing of arguments and when the Court was going to dismiss the said applications. However, now the third application for suspension of sentence has been filed by the appellant claiming parity with his co -convict in connected criminal appeal No.86/11 in which one of the co -convict namely Abdul Gaffar has been ordered to be enlarged on bail after suspension of his sentence vide order dated 28th March, 2012 passed by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sheel Nagu. The order dated 28th March, 2012 by which sentence of appellant's co -convict Abdul Gaffar was suspended does not spell out any reason for suspension of sentence, and therefore, in the opinion of this Court, the ground of parity claimed by the appellant in the present case ipso facto is not available to him. Since the appellant in the present case is claiming parity with his co -convict Abdul Gaffar for suspension of his sentence and since the order of suspension of sentence granted to Abdul Gaffar does not spell out any reason, it shall be in the fitness of things if the plea of parity claimed by the appellant in the present case is considered by the same Bench which has suspended the sentence of appellant's co -convict Abdul Gaffar vide its order dated 28th March, 2012. Hence, the Registry is directed to place the matter before Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice for appropriate orders for hearing on I.A.No.1834/2012 filed by the appellant in the present case for suspension of his sentence on the ground of parity.