Dhirubhai Naranbhai Patel, J. - (1.) THE present interlocutory application has been preferred by the appellant, namely, Shyam Soni alias Shambhu Soni, who is original accused No. 2 in the Sessions Trial, under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for suspension of sentence, during pendency of this appeal, passed by learned District Judge -I -cum -Special Judge, Dhanbad, dated 31st May, 2012 in connection with Sessions Trial No. 606 of 2009, whereby and whereunder, he has been convicted mainly for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. Having heard learned counsel for both the sides and looking to the evidence on record, there is a prima facie case against this appellant. Previously also the prayer for suspension of sentence, made on behalf of this appellant, has been rejected by this Court by a speaking order, dated 10th September, 2012, paragraph No. 3 thereof reads as under: 3. Having heard the learned counsels for both the sides and looking to the evidence on record of the Sessions Trial, there is a prima facie case against the present appellant -accused. As the criminal appeal is pending, we are not much analyzing the evidence on record. Suffice it to say that looking to the deposition given by other prosecution witnesses and also looking to Ext. 3 and Ext. 3/1 and also looking to the fact that several incriminating articles have been recovered, upon the statement of the co -accused and these articles have also been identified by the informant -P.W. 7, the evidences collectively constitute prima facie case against the appellant -accused and also looking to the gravity of the offence and quantum of punishment, we are not inclined to suspend the sentence awarded by the District & Sessions Judge -1 -cum -Special Judge, Dhanbad in Sessions Trial No. 606 of 2009, whereby the appellant -accused has been convicted mainly for the offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code as well as for the offence punishable under Section 365 of the Indian Penal Code for seven years by the order of sentence dated 31 -5 -2012.
(2.) IN view of the aforesaid facts and keeping in mind that there is no change in the circumstances thereafter, we are not inclined to suspend the sentence, awarded to this appellant (original accused No. 2), by the learned trial court in connection with Sessions Trial No. 606 of 2009. There being no substance, this interlocutory application being I.A. No. 1765 of 2012 is hereby dismissed.;