- (1.) THE present application has been preferred under section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for suspension of sentence awarded by the 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Deoghar who has convicted the present applicant vide order dated 28 th August, 2007 whereby the present applicant is mainly convicted under Section 302 to be read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code for life imprisonment as well as for offence under Section 201 to be read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code for five years.
(2.) WE have heard learned counsel for both sides at length. Looking to the evidences on record, we find that there is prima facie case against the present applicant. The case of the prosecution is based upon circumstantial evidence and looking to the deposition given by PW.2, PW.3 and PW.4 who have given detailed narration that the deceased was in the company of the present applicant. As the criminal appeal is pending, we are not much analyzing the evidences on record. There is another set of evidence like PW.5, PW.7 and PW.15 who have seen the present applicant and they have given their deposition in detail. Looking to the gravity of the offence, quantum of punishment and the manner in which the present applicant is involved in the offence as alleged by the prosecution and also looking to the medical evidence given by PW.17 Dr. Rameshwar Mahato and looking to the number of injuries upon the body of the deceased and looking to the fact that previously three times also, the prayer for suspension of sentence of the present applicant has been rejected by this Court on different occasions and this is the 4 th attempt, we are not inclined to suspend the sentence awarded by the trial Court to the present applicant namely Chandan Laha @ Chandan Kr. Laha.
(3.) THERE is no substance in the present interlocutory application which is accordingly rejected.;