GOPAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard learned counsel for applications-appellants Gopal, Mahesh and Vishambhar and learned PP for the State on this application for suspension of sentence under Section 389 Cr.P.C. and have perused the impugned judgment dated 30.7.2004 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Hindauncity, District Karoli in Sessions Case No. 118/2001 (61/92).

(2.) It has been contended by their learned counsel that the charge against the applicants, was for the offence under Section 307 read with Section 149 Indian Penal Code along with other charges but they have been convicted for the substantive offence under Section 307 Indian Penal Code for which there was no charge against them. In this connection, reliance has been placed on the cases of Suraj Pal v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1955 SC 419 and Lakhan Mahto v. State of Bihar, AIR 1966 SC 1742 and it has been urged that in view of the aforesaid cogent legal grounds, the sentence of the applicants may be suspended.

(3.) Having regard to the submissions made at the bar, the fact that they were on bail during trial and there is no immediate prospect of their appeal being heard in near future, I deem it just and proper to suspend their sentence.