BINOD SANYASI Vs. STATE OF SIKKIM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application for suspension of sentence dated 30.05.2019 passed by the learned Special Judge (POCSO) Gyalshing West Sikkim, in S.T. (POCSO) Case No. 25 of 2018. The Appellant has been convicted under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and sentence to undergo simple imprisonment for a term of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- only. The Appellant has sought a prayer for suspension of sentence. On the request of the learned Counsel for the Appellant liberty was granted to him to file an additional affidavit which was filed today and taken on record.

(2.) In the additional affidavit it has been stated that during the trial the Appellant had been granted bail by the learned Special Judge and he has abided by the terms and conditions contained therein. It is also pleaded that the Appellant is just 22 years and a permanent resident of West Sikkim and there is no chance of absconding or jumping bail. It is stated that the Appellant is a farmer by occupation and the sole earning member of the family looking after his aged parents. It is submitted that the Appellant is ready to abide by any terms and conditions imposed if he is granted bail.

(3.) The learned Assistant Public Prosecutor opposed the suspension of sentence and grant of bail. Relying upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Kishori lal v. Rupa & Ors. it was submitted that Section 389 of the Cr.P.C. deals with suspension of execution of sentence pending appeal and release of the Appellant on bail. It is submitted that there is a distinction between bail and suspension of sentence. It was pointed out that one of the essential ingredients of Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) is the requirement for the Appellate Court to record reasons in writing for ordering suspension of execution of sentence.