Court No. - 77 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 8577 of 2024 Appellant :- Mohd Kamran Respondent :- State of U.P. Counsel for Appellant :- Mohd Irteqa Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Manoj Bajaj,J. (Order on Suspension of Sentence Application) Applicant-Appellant, namely, Mohd Kamran has applied for suspension of sentence during pendency of the appeal, arising against the judgment of conviction dated 19.07.2024 and order of sentence dated 22.07.2024 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (Gangster Act), Court No.04, Aligarh in Sessions Trial Nos. 567 of 2017 and 568 of 2017, thereby convicting the appellant under Sections 307, 323, 504 I.P.C. and 3/25 Arms Act, followed by imposition of sentence of seven years, under Section 307 I.P.C. with fine of Rs. 10,000/-, one year, under section 323 I.P.C. with fine of Rs. 500/-, one year, under Section 504 I.P.C. with fine of Rs.1,000/- and two years, under Section 3/25 Arms Act with fine of Rs.2,500/- with a further condition that in the event of non deposit of fine, convict shall undergo further imprisonment of three months, one week, two weeks and one month, respectively. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that according to the injured, the gun shot was fired by the accused from the front, whereas the bullet brushed the victim's hair on the head from the back side, therefore, it is clear that the applicant has been falsely implicated. He submits that no gun shot injury has been suffered by the injured, therefore, it is clear that the trial Court has not carefully analyzed the prosecution evidence while convicting him. Learned counsel has submitted that the applicant is in custody since his conviction on 19.7.2024 and prays for suspension of sentence as the appeal would consume considerable time to get mature for final hearing. The prayer is opposed by learned State Counsel who has argued that the applicant was armed with a firearm weapon and the victim has identified him as the assailant, therefore, it cannot be said that the trial Court has not evaluated the prosecution evidence properly. He submits that the trial Court has passed a well reasoned judgement and considering the nature of the offence, the applicant does not deserve the suspension of sentence. He prays that the application be dismissed. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering their submissions, this Court finds that according to the prosecution, the first shot fired by the applicant did not hit the injured and after reloading the countrymade pistol, when he fired again, the complainant ran to save himself and the shot went passed him touching his hair on the head. Admittedly, the applicant has undergone a period of approximately eight months after conviction against the total sentence of seven years, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for the suspension of sentence, at this stage. The application is dismissed. Order on Appeal Let this appeal in due course. Order Date :- 9.4.2025 Shiv Digitally signed by :- SHIV KUMAR SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad