Page No.# 1/3 GAHC030003502026 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : I.A.(Crl.)/30/2026 in Crl.A./13/2026 Sh. Rohmingliana S/o Hualsailova R/o Tuikual South B Mual Aizawl Mizoram VERSUS The State of Mizoram and Anr. R/b the Secretary to the Government of Mizoram Home Department Aizawl 2:The Officer-in-Charge Aizawl Police Station Aizawl District Aizawl Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. C Lalfakzuala Advocate for the Respondent : P.P./Addl.PP Mizoram Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI ORDER 26.05.2026 Heard Mr. C Lalfakzuala, learned counsel for the applicant. Also heard Ms. Linda L Fambawl, learned Public Prosecutor, Mizoram for the State. This is an application under Section 430(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking suspension of execution of the sentence imposed by judgment and order dated 27.03.2026 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Aizawl Judicial District, Aizawl in Sessions Case No. 51/2020 Criminal Trial No. 952/2020, whereby the applicant stands convicted under Section 324 of the IPC read with Sections 25(1-B)(a) and 27(1) of the Arms Act, 1959, and sentenced accordingly. Mr. C. Lalfakzuala, learned counsel appearing for the applicant, submits that during the pendency of the trial, the applicant remained on bail and there is nothing on record to suggest any misuse of the liberty so granted. It is further contended that the conviction is under challenge in the connected appeal on substantial and arguable grounds, and that unless the sentence is suspended during the pendency of the appeal, the applicant would suffer prejudice which may not be adequately remedied, particularly having regard to the fixed-term nature of the sentence imposed. Ms. Linda L. Fambawl, learned Public Prosecutor, appearing for the State, while opposing the prayer, fairly submits that there is no material to indicate that the applicant had misused the privilege of bail during trial. She, however, contends that the conviction is founded on appreciation of evidence and, therefore, no case for suspension of sentence is made out. This Court has considered the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. At this stage, a detailed examination of the merits of the conviction would be inappropriate lest it prejudices the consideration of the appeal. However, upon a prima Page No.# 3/3 facie consideration, it appears that the grounds urged in the connected appeal raise arguable issues requiring fuller examination at the stage of final hearing. It is also relevant that the applicant had remained on bail throughout the trial and there is no allegation of breach of conditions or misuse of liberty. The sentence imposed is for a fixed term and, if the sentence is not suspended pending disposal of the appeal, the applicant may undergo a substantial part of the sentence before the appeal is taken up for final adjudication, thereby rendering the statutory remedy of appeal substantially nugatory. In view of the totality of the circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that a case for suspension of execution of sentence pending disposal of the connected appeal is made out. Accordingly, the execution of the sentence imposed by judgment and order dated 27.03.2026 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Aizawl Judicial District, Aizawl in Sessions Case No. 51/2020 Criminal Trial No. 952/2020 shall remain suspended during the pendency of the connected appeal. The applicant shall continue on the same bail terms and conditions as were operative during the trial, subject to any further orders of this Court. The interlocutory application is, accordingly, allowed. JUDGE Comparing Assistant