Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010055522025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/299/2025 in Crl.A./101/2025 SHIBU SUTRADHAR AND 2 OTHERS S/O. SAMBARU SUTRADHAR 2: OLEN SUTRADHAR S/O. JAMIN SUTRADHAR 3: LAKSHMAN SUTRADHAR S/O. BIPIN SUTRADHAR ALL ARE R/O. VILL.- NO. 1 AIE POWALI (HATISAR) P/S. RANIKHATA DIST. CHIRANG ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP BY THE PP ASSAM 2:FAGUNI SUTRADHAR D/O. LT. LIKU SUTRADHAR W/O. SRI PASHUMIA SUTRADHAR R/O. VILL.- UTTAR RANIKATA BHUR TINIALI P/O. AND P/S. RANIKHATA DIST. CHIRANG (BTC) ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : B KHAKHLARY, N NATH,MR R RAJKHOWA,MS. K DEKA,U SWARGIARY Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 06.08.2026 (M. Zothankhuma, J) Heard Mr. N. Mahajan, learned counsel for the applicants/appellants and Mr. K. K. Das, learned Addl. PP, Assam. 2. The present application is for suspension of the sentence to be undergone by the three applicants, pursuant to the impugned judgment dated 21.01.2025, passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Chirang at Kajalgaon in Sessions Special Case No. 2/2020, by which the applicants had been convicted under Sections 120B/302, 120/447 IPC. 3. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties, we have noticed the evidence of PW-2, who is a deaf and dumb witness and who had identified the three applicants herein as the persons, who had assaulted the deceased persons, which led to their death. 4. Though the applicants’ counsel submits that in terms of the evidence of PW-13, only Lakshman Sutradhar and Olen Sutradhar had been identified as the assailants, who had assaulted the deceased persons. As it is only the evidence of PW-2, who has now identified Shibu Sutradhar, as one of the assailants, Shibu Sutradhar should be granted bail as he was not identified earlier. 5. On the other hand, Mr. K. K. Das, learned Addl. PP submits that the evidence having clearly shown that all the three applicants had been identified as the assailants, who had assaulted the deceased persons, which led to their death, the present application should be rejected. 6. On considering the fact that PW-2 has identified the three applicants as the Page No.# 3/3 persons who had assaulted the deceased persons, which led to their death, we are not inclined to allow the present application for suspension of the sentence at this stage. Further, the paper book has been furnished to the learned counsels for the parties and the appeal had been listed on 16.09.2026 for final hearing. 7. In view of the above reason also, the present application is rejected. JUDGE JUDGE Comparing Assistant