- (1.) THIS order will dispose of both the applications filed on behalf of accused appellants, Moinuddin and Parvez. Learned counsel for appellants submitted that main accused in the present case is Shakir, who has been convicted under Section 302 IPC simplicitor, whereas present appellants have been convicted under Sections 302 read with Section 120b IPC. He also submitted that entire conviction of appellants is based on statement of Approver i.e. PW. 1 Mujeeb, whereas from his statement, it is clear that he was not involved in the crime and he was not an accused, therefore, he could not have become accomplice in the matter. He submitted that there is no other evidence in the case to connect the accused persons with the crime. He also submitted that there is no corroborative evidence to corroborate the statement of PW. 1 Mujeeb. In support of his submission, he referred Mrinal Das and Ors. vs. The State of Rajasthan,, 2011 (3) ACJ 439 (S.C.), wherein it was held that it is almost unsafe to convict an accused on the statement of accomplice alone unless there is a corroboration to the statement to accomplice, which is not available in the present case.
(2.) LEARNED Dy. Govt. Advocate opposed the bail applications.
(3.) WE have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and examined the impugned judgment passed by trial court. Learned counsel for both the parties have not disputed that there is no direct evidence in the present case to connect the accused persons with the crime. The conviction is based on statement of PW. 1 Mujeeb, an approver. We have examined the statement of PW. 1 Mujeeb, however, any comments on the statement of PW. 1, Mujeeb, at this stage, may prejudice the case of either party, but after considering the statement of PW. 1 in the light of submission of learned counsel for appellants and law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in Mrinal Das and Ors. vs. The State of Tripura (supra), we are satisfied that this is a fit case for suspension of sentence of imprisonment of the appellants particularly when their case is distinguishable from the case of main accused Shakir, however, without expressing any opinion on merits and demerits of the case, but looking to all the facts and circumstances of the case, we allow both the applications.;