Page No.# 1/6 GAHC010084692026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case : I.A.(Crl.)/468/2026 in Crl. A/ 167 of 26 RAMU DAS S/O. LT. SUKHNA RAM DAS R/O. VILL.- KULHATI P/S. HAJO DIST. KAMRUP ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REP BY THE PP ASSAM 2:SRI BARNALI SALOI S/O. SRI HAREN CHANDRA SALOI R/O. JAMTOLA P/S. RANGIA DIST. KAMRUP ASSAM PIN-781354 ------------ Advocate for : MR. N MAHAJAN Advocate for : PP ASSAM appearing for THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR SHARMA Page No.# 2/6 ORDER Date : 29 .0 7 . 2026 Heard Mr. B.K. Mahajan, learned counsel for the applicant/ appellant and Mr. K.K. Parasar, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam, appearing for the State respondent No. 1. Also heard Mr. A. Khan, learned counsel for the respondent No. 2. [2] As Mr. A. Khan is representing the respondent No. 2, Ms. M.K. Brown, learned Amicus Curiae is released. [3] This I.A. has been preferred seeking suspension of the sentence of 10 years R.I and fine of Rs. 10,000/- in default S.I. for 2 months under Section 376 IPC and S.I for 6 months under Section 417 IPC imposed by the impugned judgment and order dated 06.04.2026, passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, FTC, Rangia in Sessions Case No. 11/2022. [4] The facts of the case are that on 24/1/2022 the Informant/Opposite Party No.2 lodged an FIR before the Officer-in-Charge of Rangia Police Station alleging inter-alia that on 19/04/2021 the FIR named accused person first came to their house for seeing girl for the purpose of marriage. On that day as per rituals accused person acquainted with their all family members and thereafter, accused informed over phone that he likes her and wanted to marry her. Thereafter, her family members also gave consent to the proposal of the accused and decided to marry her with the accused and in that way both the family members had cordial relation and accused person made phone call to her. On 05/10/2021 accused person came to her house and said that he will soon marry her and give respect of her as his wife and made proposal for physical Page No.# 3/6 relation with her. Thereafter, firstly she did not give her consent of such proposal then accused by inducement tried to take her consent and thereafter accused made sexual relation with her without her will and accused promised her that he will soon fixed the date of their marriage in consultation with his family members. Thereafter, on 18/10/2021 at 9:00 p.m. in the house of Namita Malakar i.e. elder sister of her again committed sexual relation with her with promise of marriage without her consent. It is to be noted that on 19/11/2021 accused person along with FIR named Accused Nos. 2 and 3 came to her house for the purpose of fixing the date of their marriage on 22/01/2022 and hence, her father make advancement of arrangement of marriage accordingly and gave advance money everywhere for golden jewelry, furniture, clothes and pendal for marriage and also brought marriage invitation cards and distributed it for invitation to her marriage. But, lastly, accused betrayed with her along with her family members. Accused person taking advantage of her simplicity with a promised of marrying her socially committed sexual intercourse with her and presently he betrayed her for not marrying her and lowered her reputation in the society. On the other hand FIR named Accused Nos. 2 and 3 defamed her in the society. The accused person's in such immoral act her reputation lowered in the society and in the name her marriage they incurred loss of Rs. 5,00000/- and hence the case. [5] The learned counsel for the applicant/ appellant has referred to the materials on record submitted that the alleged victim lady was aged about 26 years at the time of occurrence and admittedly she had consented to sexual intercourse with the accused on two occasions as marriage between them was already fixed. It is further submitted that the applicant/ appellant while denying any such offence, never had any intention to deceive the victim lady. Page No.# 4/6 Furthermore, the said victim lady has since got married with some other persons. Hence, prayer has been made for suspending the impugned sentence. [6] In this regard, the learned counsel for applicant/ appellant has referred to decisions of the Hon‘ble Apex Court in (1) Bhagwan Rama Shinde Gosai and others Vs. State of Gujarat [(1999) 4 SCC 421: 1999 SCC (Cri) 553: 1999 SCC Online SC 572], (2) Kiran Kumar Vs. State of M.P. [(2001) 9 SCC 211: 2002 SCC (Cri) 1017: 2000 SCC Online SC 1217] and (3) Narcotic Control Bureau Vs. Lakhwinder Singh [2025 SCC Online SC 366]. [7] Per contra, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor referring to the impugned judgment and order submitted that the appellant/ applicant spent only a period of 3 months in jail and therefore, does not deserved to be released on bail at this stage by suspending the sentence. The learned Addl. P.P. has referred to the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Omprakash Sahni Vs. Jai Shankar Chaudhary and anr. Etc. [2023 LiveLaw (SC) 389]. [8] The learned counsel appearing for the informant/ victim has submitted that the informant/ victim has no objection, if the sentence is suspended, pending hearing of the appeal. [9] In Bhagwan Rama (supra), the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that the prayer for suspension of sentence should the considered liberally when a person is sentenced for a fixed period and appeal is filed under any statutory right, unless there are exceptional circumstances. That was a case when the appellant was sentenced to 10 years R.I. and the Hon’ble Apex Court had suspended the same. Page No.# 5/6 [10] To similar effect is the decision in Kiran Kumar (supra). In Lakhbwinder Singh (Supra), the Hon’ble Apex Court has held that in the cases of fixed sentences if the court takes a rigid approach, in a large number of cases, when appeal is finally heard the appellant would undergo entire sentence which would be the violation of the rights of the accused under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. [11] In the case of Omprakash Sahani (Supra) cited on behalf of the prosecution, it has been held that the endeavour on the part of the court should be to see as to whether the case presented by the prosecution and accepted by the trial court can be said to be a case in which ultimately the convict stands a fair chance of acquittal. However, while undertaking the said exercise what is to be looked into is something palpable or very apparent or gross on the face of the record, on the basis of which the Court can arrive at a prima facie satisfaction that the conviction may not be sustainable. [12] A perusal of the impugned judgment and order, leads the Court to be of the prima facie view that the material on the basis of which the learned trial Court came to the finding that the applicant/ appellant never intended to marry the victim does not find adequate reflection and discussion. [13] Having regard to the aforesaid aspect of the matter, which was crucial for determining the guilt of the accused/ appellant, and also having regard to the fact that the victim has no objection to the suspension of the sentence, I consider it fit to suspend the sentence imposed by the learned trial Court as above. Accordingly, the impugned sentence, pending disposal of the appeal, is suspended and the applicant/ appellant is directed to be released on bail of Rs. Page No.# 6/6 50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount the to satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. [14] The I.A. stands disposed of accordingly. [15] List the connected appeal. JUDGE Comparing Assistant