Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010085302024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/587/2024 HANUFA NASRIN D/O HANIF ALI CHOUDHURY VILL.- HOWLY TOWN WARD NO. 3 P.S.- HOWLY DIST.- BARPETA ASSAM PIN- 781316. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REP. BY THE P.P. ASSAM. 2:ABDUL LATIF S/O ABDUL MALEK VILL.- CHAPRA P.S.- BARPETA DIST.- BARPETA ASSAM PIN- 781301. ------------ Advocate for : MR. S C BISWAS Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA ORDER Date :11.06.2025 [M. Choudhury, J] Heard Mr. S.C. Biswas, learned counsel for the applicant-appellant and Ms. A. Begum, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the opposite party- respondent no. 1, State of Assam. 2. The instant application under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is preferred seeking suspension of execution of the sentence passed against the applicant-appellant and for her release on bail. 3. The applicant as the appellant has preferred the accompanying criminal appeal against a Judgment and Order dated 27.02.2024 passed by the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Barpeta in Sessions Case no. 129/2021, arising out of Barpeta Police Station Case no. 413/2021. By the Judgment and Order dated 27.02.2024, the applicant-appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 302, Indian Penal Code [IPC] for committing filicide and also, under Section 323, IPC. For the offence under Section 302, IPC, the applicant- appellant has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and for the offence under Section 323, IPC, the applicant-appellant has been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year. No order of payment of fine has, however, been made. It has been ordered that the sentences would run concurrently. 4. The case records of Sessions Case no. 129/2021 are received. 5. For the purpose of consideration of the prayer made by the applicant- Page No.# 3/4 appellant in this application, we have gone through the testimony of the prosecution witnesses including the medical evidence in the form of Post- Mortem Examination Report and the Injury Report as well the testimony of the Autopsy Doctor [P.W.5] who performed the Post Mortem Examination on the deceased child and the Medical Officer [P.W.8] who provided the treatment immediately after the incident to the other child of the applicant-appellant [P.W.9]. It is found that the prosecution witnesses, P.W.2 and P.W.4 had testified as eye-witnesses. According to their accounts, the applicant-appellant thrashed one of her child which resulted into the injuries and their testimony is found to be consistent with the injuries recorded in the Post Mortem Examination Report. 6. In considering the prayer for suspension of execution of the sentence and the prayer for bail involving a serious offence like murder punishable under Section 302, IPC, more particularly, when the offence is filicide, the Court has to give consideration to the relevant factors like the nature of accusation made against the applicant-appellant; the manner of commission of the alleged crime; the gravity of the offence and the sentence imposed. Having due regard to all the relevant facts, we are of the considered view that the applicant-appellant has not been able to made out a prima facie case for granting relief of suspension of execution of the sentence pending disposal of the accompanying criminal appeal in exercise of the power under Section 389 CrPC. Consequently, the application is found to be bereft of merits and the same is accordingly, dismissed. 7. It is, however, made clear that the observations made hereinabove are only for the purpose of considering the prayer for suspension of execution of the sentence and grant of bail to the applicant-appellant and the same shall not be construed as observations made with regard to the merits of the accompanying Page No.# 4/4 criminal appeal. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant