AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Leave granted.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The appellant is before us aggrieved by the impugned order refusing to suspend the sentence and to grant him bail during the pendency of the criminal appeal filed against the conviction and sentence passed u/s 302 read with Section 34 of the Penal Code.
Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the other co-accused have been granted bail. He added that even the co-accused, to whom a stab injury by knife was attributed, has already been released on bail and the only allegation against the appellant is that he caused an injury with a piece of brick; under the circumstances, the High Court should have suspended the sentence and granted bail to the appellant also. He also submitted that the High Court did not consider any one of the contentions raised in the application seeking suspension of sentence.
Learned counsel for the respondent State submitted that there is a role attributed to the appellant and the cause of the death of the deceased was as a result of the cumulative effect of injuries attributed to all the accused persons, including the injury attributed to the appellant. As to why the bail should not have been granted to the appellant when the co-accused has been granted bail as against the allegation of stab injury by him, the learned counsel only said that the appellant has been convicted with the aid of Section 34 of the Penal Code.
Under the circumstances, we think the prayer of the appellant is just for grant of bail and he is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Hence, the appeal is allowed. The sentence passed against the appellant, pending criminal appeal, is suspended. The appellant is granted bail, subject to the satisfaction of the trial Court.