- (1.) The present application has been preferred under Section 389(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for suspension of sentence awarded by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Raj Mahal in Sessions Case No. 213 of 2005 / Sessions Trial No. 140 of 2007, whereby the present applicant Prabhu Yadav, who is original accused no. 5 and appellant no. 5, is convicted mainly for the offence punishable under Section 302 to be read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code for life imprisonment.
(2.) We have perused the records and proceedings of Sessions Trial and heard counsels for both the sides for prayer for suspension of sentence awarded to the appellant no. 5.
(3.) Having heard counsel for both the sides and looking to the evidences on record, there is prima facie case against the present appellant, who is Prabhu Yadav. As the criminal appeal is pending, we are not much analyzing the evidences on record, but suffice it to say that as per the prosecution witnesses, the case of the prosecution is based upon the two eye witnesses who are P.W. 1 & P.W. 5. Looking to their depositions, they have narrated the incident at length and the role played by the appellants accused including the present applicant. Moreover, the depositions of these two eye witnesses is also getting enough corroboration by the depositions of other prosecution witnesses. Previously, the prayer for suspension of sentence by the very same applicant was canvassed and rejected by this Court. This is second attempt. Looking to the evidences on record and gravity of offence, quantum of punishment and the manner in which the present appellant is involved in the offence as alleged by the prosecution, we are not inclined to suspend the sentence awarded to the appellant no. 5, namely, Prabhu Yadav, by the trial court.;