SHOWKAT AHMAD RATHER Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application filed on behalf of the convict Showkat Ahmad Rather, praying for suspension of sentence till final disposal of the appeal. Alternatively, it is prayed that the convict may be granted bail till the appeal is decided. The applicant/convict was charged for the commission of offences punishable under sections 306, 498-A RPC in a case arising from FIR No. 73 of 2006 registered at Police Station, Sumbal. The learned Principal Sessions Judge, 13an-dipora, vide his judgment dated 26.11.2013 found the convict guilty of both the offences and, accordingly, convicted him. Vide order dated 29.11.2013, the learned trial court has awarded a punishment of two years' rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 5000.00 for the commission of offence under Section 498-A RPC and seven years' rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 10,000.00 for the commission of offence under Section 306 RPC. The sentences have been ordered to run concurrently and in default of payment of fine, the convict has been order to undergo a simple imprisonment for a further period of 3 months each under Section 498-A and 306 RPC. The period of detention already undergone by the convict, either during the course of investigation or the trial of the case, has been ordered to be set off against the substantive sentence. Against the said judgment of convict and order of sentencing, the convict has filed Criminal Appeal, registered as Cr. Appeal No. 22/2013.

(2.) Suspension of the conviction and/or the grant of bail pending decision in the appeal is sought on the grounds that the convict is a young bread earner for his family who has been imprisoned for quite a long time and that his further detention will lead his family to starvation; that the convict belongs to a poor, but a respectable family and his arrest by police has brought his family to ridicule and disrespect; that the convict has to prosecute his appeal and he needs funds which can be arranged by him only when he is out of jail; that the Court because of overload of cases cannot visualize final hearing of the case in near future.

(3.) The application has been contested by the State, inter alia, on the grounds that there are no justifiable reasons available to the applicant to seek suspension of sentence or grant of bail till the disposal of the appeal. It is stated that the offences committed by the convict have been proved to the hilt by oral as well as circumstantial evidence and that there are no cogent and sufficient grounds available to the applicant to challenge the verdict that has resulted in his conviction.