Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010145442025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Rev.P./375/2025 SRI ARABINDA KACHARI S/O LATE SUKURAM KACHARI R/O UDMARI, P.O. BOGPORI P.S. TANGLA, DIST. UDALGURI, BTR,ASSAM, PIN-784509. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REP BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:SRI BIREN BORO S/O SRI MAHESWAR BORO R/O UDMARI P.O. BOGPORI P.S. TANGLA DIST. UDALGURI BTR ASSAM PIN-78450 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S CHAUHAN, B CHOWHAN,R DEB,MR. P MAZUMDER Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Linked Case : I.A.(Crl.)/1016/2025 SRI ARABINDA KACHARI S/O LATE SUKURAM KACHARI R/O UDMARI Page No.# 2/4 P.O. BOGPORI P.S. TANGLA DIST. UDALGURI BTR ASSAM PIN-784509. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REP.BY THE PP ASSAM 2:SRI BIREN BORO S/O SRI MAHESWAR BORO R/O UDMARI P.O. BOGPORI P.S. TANGLA DIST. UDALGURI BTR ASSAM PIN-784509 ------------ Advocate for : MR. S CHAUHAN Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 15.09.2025 1) Heard Mr. S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Ms. N. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam. 2) This application under Section 430 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed by the applicant for suspension of sentence imposed on him by the impugned Judgment dated 30.11.2024, which was upheld by the Judgment dated 20.05.2025, in Criminal Appeal No.30/2024. 3) The said Judgment has been impugned by the applicant in the connected Criminal Revision Petition No.375/2025, by the impugned Judgment Page No.# 3/4 of the Trial Court the petitioner was convicted under Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 (three) months and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for 2 (two) months. 4) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has preferred the connected Criminal Revision Petition against the impugned Judgment and is hopeful of getting a favorable result in the said Criminal Revision Petition. He also submits that considering the short term of sentence imposed on the petitioner unless the further execution of the sentence imposed by the impugned Judgment is stayed during the pendency of the connected Criminal Revision Petition, the said Revision Petition may become infructuous. 5) Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides, considering the fact that in the connected Criminal Revision Petition notices have been issued to the parties and also considering the fact that the sentence imposed on the petitioner by the impugned Judgment is a short term sentence of only 3 (three) months. 6) This Court is of the considered opinion that this is a fit case where the sentence imposed on the petitioner by the impugned Judgment may be stayed during the pendency of the connected Criminal Revision Petition and the same is accordingly done. 7) The petitioner is also allowed to go on bail of Rs.30,000/- with one surety of like amount subject to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udalguri in PRC Case No.126/2024 with a condition that in the event of dismissal of connected Criminal Revision Petition No.375/2025, the petitioner shall surrender before the Trial Court to serve a sentence imposed on him by the impugned Judgment. Page No.# 4/4 8) This I.A. accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant