Court No. - 77 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 926 of 2025 Appellant :- Suneel Respondent :- State of U.P. Counsel for Appellant :- Suneel Kumar Mishra Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Manoj Bajaj,J. (Order on Suspension of Sentence Application) Applicant-Appellant, namely, Suneel stands convicted through judgment dated 13.12.2024 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.8, Moradabad in Sessions Trial Nos. 336 of 2017 and 338 of 2017, arising out of Crime Nos. 649 of 2016 and 650 of 2016, under Sections 307, 394, 411 I.P.C. and Section 3/25 Arms Act, registered at Police Station Bilari, District Moradabad and have been sentenced for commission of various offences alongwith fine. Learned counsel for applicants submits that the trial court has overlooked the material discrepancies in the prosecution case while passing the impugned judgment of conviction dated 13.12.2024. He submits that the evidence on records adduced by the prosecution is seriously inadmissible as far as the involvement of the applicant in the alleged commission of crime is concerned. Learned counsel submits that out of the total sentence of ten years imposed upon the applicants, a period of approximately eleven months has already been undergone by the applicants and in this regard, he has drawn the attention of the court to the counter affidavit containing custody certificate dated 25.02.2025 of the applicants issued by Senior Superintendent, District Jail, Moradabad. Learned counsel submits that the appeal is likely to succeed on the basis of the grounds pleaded and prays for suspension of sentence during the pendency of the appeal. The prayer is opposed by learned State Counsel who has argued that the applicant was involved in commission of crime who was apprehended on the spot. He submits that the applicant was armed with firearm weapon who after looting the money from the victims fired on them and caused serious injuries. He prays that the application for suspension of sentence be dismissed. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering their submissions, this Court finds that the case of the prosecution is based upon evidence of eye witnesses and P.W.2, Rahees in his testimony before the trial Court had identified the applicant in Court who was wearing yellow shirt and has clearly stated that he fired at his father. Thus, considering the seriousness of the offence and the period of detention undergone by the applicant, this Court is not inclined to suspend the sentence of the applicant, at this stage. Resultantly, without meaning any expression of opinion on the merits of this case, the application fails and is hereby dismissed. Let the appeal be listed for final hearing. Order Date :- 4.4.2025 Shiv Digitally signed by :- SHIV KUMAR SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad