Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010269332024 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/1228/2024 ALI HOSEN @ ALI HUSSAIN AND 2 ORS S/O. LATE SOIMUDDIN R/O. VILL. BOALKAMURI P/S. BILASIPARA DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM. 2: ENNUS ALI LATE BAHAL UDDIN R/O. VILL.- BOALKAMURI PART-I P/S. BILASIPARA DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM. 3: ABU SIDDIQUE @ MD. ABU SIDDIQUE SK LATE BAHAL UDDIN R/O. VILL.- BOALKAMURI PART-I P/S. BILASIPARA DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REP. BY THE PP ASSAM 2:SUKUR ALI S/O. LATE AKKEL ALI R/O. VILL. BOALKAMURI PART NO.-I P/S. BILASIPARA DIST. DHUBRI ASSAM Page No.# 2/3 PIN-783348. ------------ Advocate for : MR. D BORA Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI ORDER 01.09.2025 (M. Zothankhuma, J) Heard Mr. A. Chaudhury, learned counsel for the applicants. Also heard Ms. A. Begum, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and A.T. Sarkar, learned counsel for the informant. This is an application under Section 430(3) of BNSS for suspension of the sentence inflicted upon the appellants, vide sentence order dated 07.10.2024, on the basis of the impugned judgment dated 05.10.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bilasipara, Dhubri, in Sessions Case No.108/2001, by which the applicants nos.1 to 3 are convicted under Section 302/325/323/149 of IPC. The learned counsel for the applicants submits that there had been a group fight among two group of persons and the conviction of the appellants by the learned Trial Court had been done, by not taking into account the fact that the applicants were also being attacked by the other group. He submits that though there were eyewitnesses, who named the applicants as the perpetrator of the assault on the three deceased persons, the evidence shows that the death of Page No.# 3/3 the deceased persons could not have been due to the actions of the applicants. He accordingly submits that the sentence inflicted upon the applicants should be suspended and the applicants should be released on bail. On the other hand, the counsels for the respondents submit that the applicants have all been implicated by the eyewitnesses, as having assaulted all the three deceased persons. In this regard, they have relied upon the evidence of PW-5, 8, 9, 11,12 & 15. They submit that the evidence of the eyewitnesses shows that weapons had been used by the applicants, for causing injury on the deceased persons. They submit that as three persons had died due to the assault by the applicants group, the application should not be allowed. We have considered the submissions made by the counsels for the parties and on perusing the evidence of the eyewitnesses, we are of the view that the sentence imposed upon the applicants should not be interfered with at this stage. Consequently, the I.A(Crl.) is rejected. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant