Court No. - 81 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 12452 of 2024 Appellant :- Vinod Kumar Respondent :- State of U.P. Counsel for Appellant :- Brajesh Kumar Singh,Devendra Kumar,Sanjay Kr. Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Connected Alongwith (1) Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 12557 of 2024 Appellant :- Lakhan Singh Respondent :- State of U.P. Counsel for Appellant :- Brajesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. (2) Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 12558 of 2024 Appellant :- Chatur Singh Respondent :- State of U.P. Counsel for Appellant :- Brajesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Manoj Bajaj,J. (Order on Suspension of Sentence Applications/Criminal Misc. Bail Applications) Applicants-Vinod Kumar, Lakhan Singh and Chatur Singh have applied for suspension of sentence during pendency of the appeal, arising against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 10.12.2024 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (POCSO Act), Court No. 3, Firozabad in Sessions Trial No. 22 of 2019, thereby convicting the appellants under Section 304 IPC, who have been sentenced for commission of the said offence alongwith fine. The applicants-convicts were prosecuted through Case Crime No. 108 of 2018, under Section 304 IPC, registered at Police Station Sikohabad, District Firozabad. Learned counsel for applicant submits that the judgment of conviction dated 10.12.2024 is not based upon the correct appreciation of evidence as material discrepancies in the prosecution case have been ignored by the trial court. Learned counsel has argued that the material witnesses have not supported the prosecution case, therefore, the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 10.12.2024 may not be sustainable. He further submits that during trial the applicants were extending the concession of regular bail, and the said concession was not misused by them, and further the appeal is not likely to be heard in near future, therefore, the remaining sentence of the applicants be suspended. While opposing the above prayer, learned A.G.A. has argued that the prosecution adduced convincing evidence to bring home the guilt of the convicts and the judgment of conviction dated 10.12.2024 is based upon correct appreciation of material on record. Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering their submissions, this Court finds that the case of the prosecution is based upon the evidence of eye-witness PW-2 (sister of the deceased) who had seen the applicants while they were giving beatings to her brother. As per the evidence of PW-3, the head injury, on the back of the head of the deceased was fatal and caused his death. That apart, the applicants have only undergone a period of seven months in custody after conviction, against the total sentence of ten years rigorous imprisonment. Thus, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for extending the concession of suspension of sentence to the applicants, at this stage. Resultantly, without meaning any expression of opinion on the merits of the appeal, the applications are dismissed. (Order on Appeals) List the appeals in due course. Order Date :- 22.7.2025 Brijesh Digitally signed by :- BRIJESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad