BORO PASWAN Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This interlocutory application has been preferred under Sec. 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for suspension of sentence awarded to this applicant by the Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C., Sahibganj in Sessions Case No. 204A of 2006, whereby this appellant has been convicted vide order dated 25th Aug., 2009 and sentenced to life imprisonment for the offence under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code to be read with section 34 thereof vide order dated 27th Aug., 2009.

(2.) Learned counsel for the appellant, while praying for suspension of sentence, during the pendency of this appeal, has submitted that there are discrepancies between the ocular evidences and the medical evidence. In fact, as per informant P.W. 9 and P.W. 1, there are three gun shots or firearm injuries, whereas, there are only two injuries as per post mortem report given by P.W. 11 Dr. Ramashraye Singh.

(3.) Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and looking to the evidences on record, it appears that there is a prima facie case against this appellant accused. As the Criminal Appeal is pending, we are not much analysing the evidences on record, but, suffice it to say looking to the evidences of P.W. 1 and P.W. 10, who are the eye witnesses, who have clearly narrated the role played by this applicant, there is prima facie case against this appellant. Moreover, looking to the medical evidence given by P.W. 11, there is enough corroboration by medical evidence to the depositions given by these two eye witnesses.