ANIL KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order shall dispose of an application filed by the applicant/appellant under Sec. 430 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short "BNSS") seeking suspension of sentence awarded by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nahan, District Sirmour, H.P., vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence dtd. 21/11/2024, in Sessions Trial No. 6-N/7 of 2018, whereby he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs.5,000.00 for the offence punishable under Sec. 324 read with Sec. 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short "IPC") and in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months, for the offence punishable under Sec. 307 read with Sec. 34 of IPC, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000.00 for the offence punishable under Sec. 307 read with Sec. 34 of IPC and in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for one year and also to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000.00 and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Sec. 504 of IPC.

(2.) The learned Senior Counsel for the applicant/appellant contended that the learned Trial Court convicted the applicant/ appellant without there being any evidence against him. He has further argued that the applicant has arguable case and has got a fair chance of acquittal. He has also contended that the applicant has a minor children and wife to support and there is no one in the family to support them, as such, the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence be suspended by allowing the instant application.

(3.) On the other hand, learned Deputy Advocate General contended that the applicant/appellant is not entitled to be released on bail during the pendency of the present appeal, as he has been convicted in a serious offence. It has been contended that in order to bring home the guilt of the applicant (appellant herein) prosecution examined 17 witnesses and the guilt of the applicant was proved beyond the reasonable doubt. It is further contended that the plea taken by the applicant that he has minor children and wife to support is not a justifiable ground to seek suspension of sentence. Lastly, it is prayed that the instant application, being devoid of merits, be dismissed.