JALAL AHMAD MAZUMDAR Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE principal question, raised in this revision, is as to whether a Sessions judge can, pending an appeal against an order of conviction and sentence, suspend, besides execution of the sentence, the operation of the order of conviction passed against the appellant. Another equally important question, raised in this revision, is as to whether it is enough for a Court, while exercising power under Section 389 (1), Cr. P. C. , to suspend the operation of the order of conviction, if the appellant shows that the order of conviction would, if not suspended, cause irreparable damage to him or is it necessary, even in such a case, for the Court, to ascertain if the order of conviction is prima facie supported by evidence on record? In other words, one of the questions, which needs to be answered, in this revision, is as to whether merit of the appeal is a factor, which needs to be taken into account, while considering the question as to whether, during pendency of an appeal, an order, convicting the appellant, needs to be suspended or not? Yet another question of great significance, which this revision raises, is as to whether suspension of sentence during pendency of an appeal shall automatically follow suspension of the order of conviction or whether the appellate Court shall, in order to suspend the order of conviction of the appellant under Section 389 (1) Cr. P. C. apply parameters different from the ones, which may be applied for suspending the sentence passed against such an appellant?

(2.) BEFORE I deal with the questions, raised in the present revision, it is necessary that the material facts, leading to this revision, are taken note of. These facts may, in a nutshell, be set out as follows :

(3.) I have heard Mr. A. K. Bhattacharjee, learned Senior counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioner, and Mr. B. B. Gogoi, learned addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam.