Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010148892025 2026:GAU-AS:1854 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/722/2025 DIPANKAR KUMAR SINHA S/O LATE SURENDRA KR. SINHA, R/O HOUSE NO. 40, INDIRA NAGAR, BASISTHA, P.S.- BASISTHA, DIST- KAMRUP (M), ASSAM, PIN-781029 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM 2:SMTI. SONU SWARGIARY D/O SRI RAM CHARAN SWARGIARY R/O VILL- PHAHURABARI P.S.- TAMULPUR DIST- BAKSA ASSAM PIN-78136 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR Z KAMAR, MR S J CHOUDHURY Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, :: BEFORE :: HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN O R D E R 11.02.2026 Heard Mr. Z. Kamar, the learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. S.J. Choudhury, the learned counsel appearing for the applicant as well as Mr. K. Baishya, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Assam. Page No.# 2/3 2. By this application filed under Section 430 of the BNSS, 2023, the applicant Dipankar Kumar Sinha has prayed for suspension of the sentence and for subsequent bail pending disposal of the connected criminal appeal being Criminal Appeal No.218/2024. 3. The applicant was convicted by judgment and order dated 10.05.2024 under Section 376 of the IPC and was sentenced to undergo 7(seven) years of rigorous imprisonment with fine and default stipulation. 4. Mr. Kamar, the learned senior counsel submits that the occurrence took place at around 2 P.M. and in the broad day light on the road of Chandmari area inside the vehicle in presence of the driver, which is unlikely as could be understood by any prudent person. He also submits that the driver allegedly present during the course of the offence, was not examined neither by the Investigating Officer nor by the trial court. Further, he submits that the medical evidence do not support the prosecution case. 5. The learned senior counsel also submits that out of total incarceration period of 7(seven) years rigorous imprisonment, the applicant has already spent more than 1½ years inside the jail till date. As such, he submits that the sentence may be suspended and the applicant be released on bail pending disposal of the connected appeal. 6. Mr. Baishya, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, however, submits that the statement of the victim is corroborated by the other evidences on record and that the evidence of the victim also corroborates each other before the police as well as before the trial court. As such, he submits that merit the case is made out and the sentence may not be suspended and bail granted to the applicant. 7. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and have gone through the records as well. 8. It is noticed that the driver of the vehicle was present when the offence was committed by the applicant and the applicant was sitting at the rear side of the vehicle Page No.# 3/3 when the incident took place. But neither the driver was examined by the police nor by the trial court. Further, it is seen that the applicant was imposed with the sentence of 7(seven) years rigorous imprisonment and that almost 2(two) years he has already spent in jail. 9. Without going into the details of the case, this Court finds it fit that sentence imposed upon the applicant be suspended pending disposal of the connected appeal and he (the applicant) be released on bail. 10. More so, it is discernible that the appeal would not be heard so early in the near future. Further, it is seen that the applicant is also medically unfit and he is amenable to various illness. 11. In view of the above, the sentence imposed upon the applicant Dipankar Kumar Sinha is suspended and he be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of ₹20,000/- with a surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge (FTC) No.4, Kamrup(M), Guwahati, Assam in Sessions Case No.75/2016. With the above direction, the instant Interlocutory Application is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant